IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 7TH OCTOBER 2010 / 15TH ASWINA 1932 MACA.No. 2545 of 2008() ---------------------------------- OPMV.800/2005 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOTTAYAM .................... APPELLANT(S): 3RD RESPONDENT -------------------------------------------------- THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, METRO PALACE, GROUND FLOOR, NORTH RAILWAY STATION ROAD, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS DULY AUTHORIZED OFFICER. BY ADV. SRI.VPK.PANICKER RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 PETITIONER --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. P.V.CHACKO @ JOSHY, PALLATHU HOUSE, MULAKULAM. 2. THOMAS PALLATHU HOUSEM MULAKULAM. 3. KUNJUMOL THOMAS, VAREEKAL NINNU, PALLATHU HOUSE, KUNNAPPALLY KARA MULAKULAM PERUVA. R3 BY ADV. SRI.M.P.MADHAVANKUTTY THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------ M.A.C.A. No. 2545 of 2008 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of October, 2010. J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Kottayam in OP(MV) No.800/2005. The claimant, a pillion rider sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.63,000/- and directed the insurance company to pay the amount. It is challenging the same, the insurance company has come up in appeal. 2. Heard. It is the contention of the insurance company that the position of a pillion rider being that of a gratuitous passenger and as no additional premium is paid, the insurance company cannot be made liable. A perusal of the award would reveal that the policy is a package policy. The Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority by virtue of a clarificatory circular issued dated 16.11.2009 after quoting the conditions, clarified that the persons travelling in a two wheeler, and the person carried in a private vehicle are covered under the terms and conditions of a Standard Motor Package Policy. This clause came up for M.A.C.A. No. 2545 of 2008 2 consideration before two Division Benches of this Court in the decisions reported in New India Assurance Company Limited V. Hydrose, (2008 (3) KLT 778) and Mathew V. Shaji Mathew, (2009 (3) KLT 813). In both these decisions, the court held that by virtue of the terms and conditions of the policy, the pillion rider is covered. Therefore, in the light of the clarificatory circular coupled with the decisions of this court, the insurance company is bound to pay compensation to a pillion rider covered by a package policy. Therefore, there is no merit in the appeal. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE ln.