IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2009 / 24TH POUSHA 1930 MACA.No. 1907 of 2008() ----------------------- OPMV.1827/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THALASSERY .................... APPELLANT(S)/RESPONDENT NO. 3: -------------- M/S.ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., PRES CLUB JN., M.G.ROAD, KASARAGOD REP. BY ITS ASSISTANT MANAGER, MOTOR THIRD PARTY CLAIMS CELL METRO PALACE, REGIONAL OFFICE, NORTH RAILWAY STATION ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-35. BY ADV. SRI.S.MAMMU RESPONDENT(S)/ PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS NO. 1 AND 2: --------------- 1. ANTO, S/O.CHACKO, PATTAR MADATHIL, CHUZHALI AMSOM, CHEMPANTHOTTY PO., 2. H.KRISHNA BHAT, S/O.H.MAHABALA BHAT HILEMANE HOUSE, KUMUMBALA PO., KASARAGOD. 3. JOSHY, S/O.MATHEW, KOLAMBAYIL HOUSE VELLAD AMSOM, KAPPIMALA PO. ADVS. SRI.PRAVEEN K. JOY FOR R1 SRI.ABHILASH MATHEW FOR R1 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.A.C.A. 1907/2008 ORDER ON I.A. 2270/08 IN M.A.C.A. 1907/2008 DISMISSED SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE 14.1.2009 //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. M.N. KRISHNAN, J ----------------------- M.A.C.A.No. 1907 OF 2008 --------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Thalassery in O.P.(MV) No.1827/2002. The claimant, a pillion rider, sustained injuries in a road accident and he has been awarded a compensation of Rs. 28,100/-. The Insurance Company's contention regarding exoneration of liability was negatived by the tribunal and it is against that decision the present appeal is preferred. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the respondents. The specific contention of the learned counsel is that being a pillion rider and as no additional premium is collected for coverage, the Insurance Company has to be exonerated from the liability in the light of the decision of the apex court reported in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Tilak Singh [2006 (4) SCC 404]. The tribunal has considered the question. The tribunal had referred under Section II(1)(i) policy conditions whereby the Insurance Company has undertaken to cover the risk of any person travelling in a motor vehicle other than for hire or reward. This M.A.C.A.No. 1907/2008 -2- clause came up for consideration before the Division Bench of this Court in the decision reported in New India Assurance Company Ltd. v. Hydrose and others [2008 (3) KHC 522]. This court held that when there is a specific condition whereby the Insurance Company has undertaken to cover the risk of a person, payment of additional premium is not necessary. Therefore under the terms of the contract the Insurance Company is bound to pay. So in the light of the said provision, one cannot find fault with the tribunal for arriving at a decision regarding the liability of the Insurance Company. Therefore the appeal lacks merit and the same is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN,JUDGE vkm