IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 17TH DECEMBER 2010 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 MACA.No. 2619 of 2010 --------------------------------- [O.P(MV).NO.1055/2002 OF MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, IRINJALAKUDA] .................... APPELLANT/4TH RESPONDENT: ----------------------------------------------- NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, ERNAKULAM, REP. BY THE MANAGER, KOCHI REGIONAL OFFICE, M.G.ROAD, COCHIN – 682 035. BY ADV. SRI.E.M.JOSEPH. RESPONDENTS/CLAIMANT AND RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SHERIF, AGED 45, S/O. MUHAMMAD, VADAKKAN HOUSE, MULAVUKAD, PONNARIMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM. 2. K.M. MATHEW, AGED 65, S/O. MATHUNNY, KOPAPRAM HOUSE, PERAMBRA, KODAKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. BRANCH MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., SREEKUMAR BUILDING, P.B. NO. 1, SOUTH JUNCTION, CHALAKUDY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 4. T.B. SAJU, AGED 29 YEARS, S/O. BALAKRISHNAN, THUNDATHIL HOUSE, MULAVUKAD NORTH END, PONNARIMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM. BY THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/12/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.NO.2619 OF 2010 ............................................. Dated this the 17th day of December, 2010. J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Irinjalakkuda in OP(MV)No.1055/2002. The claimant, a pillion rider, sustained injuries in a road accident when the bike in which he was travelling collided against a scooter resulting in injuries to him. The Tribunal has found that both the riders of the vehicle equally negligent and directed the insurance company of both the vehicles to pay the amount in equal halves. It is against that decision, the insurance company of the motor cycle has come up in appeal. It is contended that motor cycle policy does not cover the risk of the pillion rider and further, there was no negligence on the part of the motor cyclist. 2. The Tribunal on an exhaustive consideration found that the accident has taken place in the middle of the National Highway and there is no explanation tendered by both sides. The court also found that just because the police has filed a charge sheet against one of the riders, it does not militate against the other side for the reason that : 2 : M.A.C.A.NO.2619 OF 2010 when there is collision on the middle of the road, it can be only on account of composite negligence of both the drivers. Therefore, I do not find any mistake in the finding. 3. Next regarding liability of the insurance company. Admittedly the vehicle is covered by a package policy. As per the clarificatory circular issued by the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority dated 16.11.2009, the person travelling in a two wheeler is covered by the terms and conditions of the standard motor package policy. It has also been held by two Division Benches of this Court in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Hydrose (2008 (3) KLT 778) and in Mathew v. Shaji Mathew (2009 (3) KLT 813) that terms and conditions of the policy cover the risk of the pillion rider. Therefore in the light of the clarificatory circular coupled with the decision of this Court and the fact that both the drivers are equally negligent, I do not find any mistake committed by the Tribunal in awarding the compensation. Therefore, the appeal lacks merit and the same is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. cl : 3 : M.A.C.A.NO.2619 OF 2010 : 4 : M.A.C.A.NO.2619 OF 2010 M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... A.S.NO.389 OF 2001 ............................................. 11th day of November, 2010. J U D G M E N T