IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 2ND FEBRUARY 2010 / 13TH MAGHA 1931 MACA.No. 2925 of 2008 --------------------------------- (AGAINST THE AWARD DTD. 07/01/2008 IN O.P.(MV).NO.485/02 OF THE M.A.C.T, NEYYATTINKARA) .......... APPELLANT/ADDL.4TH RESPONDENT: -------------------------------------------------------- NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, REP. BY ITS MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, 3RD PARTY WING, OMANA BUILDING, PADMA JUNCTION, KOCHI-35. BY ADV. SMT.RAJI T.BHASKAR RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 RESPECTIVELY: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SHIBU, S/O.RAJAN, NIALAMEL, KALLUVIAL PUTHEN VEEDU, KADAVATTARAM DESOM, NEYYATTINKARA. 2. A.SURESH BABU, PANAVILAKOM POTTAYIL VEEDU, POOVARA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SURESH, S/O.SAMUEL, MEKAERIKIL KARMAL NIVAS, KADAVATTARAM, NEYYATTINKARA. BY THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/02/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.N. KRISHNAN, J -------------------------. MACA No.2925 OF 2008 -------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of February, 2010. J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against award of the Claims Tribunal, Neyyattinkara in O.P.(MV).No.485/2002. The claimant sustained injury in a road accident while traveling as a pillion rider and he has been awarded a compensation of Rs. 42,500/-. The tribunal directed R1, R2 and R4 in the claim petition to pay the amount. It is against that decision the insurance company has come up in appeal. 2. The policy involved in this case is a comprehensive policy. By virtue of a clarificatory circular issued by the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority dated 16.11.2009 it has been clarified that passenger in a private vehicle and persons carried out in two wheelers are covered by the terms of the Standard Motor Package Policy. The two Division Benches of this court had considered the condition embodied in such policies and had arrived at a decision that it covers the risk of the pillion rider. They are the decisions reported in 2008 (3) KLT 778 and 2009 (3) MACA No.2925/2008 2 KLT 813 ie., New India Insurance Company Vs. Hydrose and Mathew Vs. Shaji Mathew. 3. Therefore in the light of the clarificatory circular and the decisions of this court it has to be held that the Insurance company is liable. Therefore the appeal lacks merit and dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. sou.