IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 17TH AUGUST 2010 / 26TH SRAVANA 1932 MACA.No. 1664 of 2009(S) ------------------------ OPMV.463/2004 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MUVATTUPUZHA APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ---------------------------- SUBEESH, S/O.REVI, RESIDING AT KANNAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, INCHATHOTTY, KUTTAMPUZHA, KOTHAMANGALAM. BY ADV. SMT.ANEY PAUL RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------- 1. VASU, S/O.DAMODARAN, H.NO.169/W.NO.7, PADINJAREKARA HOUSE, INCHATHOTTY P.O., KUTTAMPUZHA, KOTHAMANGALAM. 2. MANISH, S/O.REVI, KANNAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, INCHATHOTTY, KUTTAMPUZHA, KOTHAMANGALAM. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., KOTHAMANGALAM BRANCH. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. No. 1664 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = == = DATED THIS, THE 17TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2010. J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha, in O.P. (MV) No. 463 of 2004. The claimant, a 24 year old young man, sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal awarded him an amount of Rs. 27,450/-; but exonerated the Insurance Company from liability on the ground that the policy does not cover the pillion rider. It is against that decision, the claimant has come up in appeal. 2. Heard the counsel and perused the records. The learned counsel had made available before me the certified copy of Ext. B1 policy produced before the Tribunal. The policy is a comprehensive package policy. By virtue of the clarificatory circular issued by the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority on 16.11.2009, persons carried in a two wheeler are covered under the terms and conditions of the standard motor package policy. The issue came up for consideration before two Division Benches of this Court in New India Insurance Company Ltd. v. Hydrose (2008 (3) KLT 778) and Mathew v. Shaji Mathew (2009(3) KLT 813) and in both MACA 1664/2009 2 these decisions, this Court held that the terms and conditions of the policy cover the pillion rider also and therefore, no additional premium is necessary. Therefore, in the light of the clarifictory circular coupled with the decisions of this Court (supra), the Insurance Company is held liable and I set aside the finding regarding exoneration of liability. 3. The next point is regarding the enhancement. An young man had sustained a fracture on the maxillar bone and fixation was done. He was treated as an inpatient from 3.4.2004 till 7.4.2004. He had incurred medical expenses of about Rs. 3,450/-. Taking into consideration that the fracture is on the maxillar bone and there would have been some temporary disability as well as pain even for movement of the face, I feel that compensation for pain and suffering can be increased by Rs. 3,000/-, thereby entitling the claimant to have an additional compensation of Rs. 3,000/-. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed and the claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs. 3,000/- with 8.5% interest on the said amount from the date of petition till realisation. It is also made clear that the Insurance Company is liable to pay the entire amount awarded and the finding of exoneration of liability is set aside. Therefore, the Insurance Company is directed to deposit the entire amount and as time has passed, MACA 1664/2009 3 when an application is moved, the entire compensation amount be disbursed to the claimant. sd/- M.N. KRISHNAN, (JUDGE) // true copy // P.S. To Judge. KNC/-