IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 9TH DECEMBER 2008 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 MACA.No. 2037 of 2008() ----------------------- OPMV.2499/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER ---------------------------------- K.S.SALIGH, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O.SULAIMAN, KOVILAKATH HOUSE, 13/436, CHULLIKKAL P.O., RAMESWARAM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, COCHIN - 682 005. BY ADV. SRI.ANIL S.RAJ RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. P.M.ALI, S/O.MOHAMMED, PALAMALAYIL HOUSE, 41/1119, 28 B, KARITHALAPARAMBU, COCHIN 682 035. 2. A.SUBAIR, S/O.ANDRU K.A., OLAKKOTTU HOUSE, NEAR SUPER STAR SODA FACTORY, CHULLIKKAL, COCHIN 682 005. 3. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, D.O. AJAY VIHAR, COCHIN - 682 016. ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB (SR.) FOR R3 SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW FOR R3 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M. N. KRISHNAN, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ M.A.C.A. No. 2037 OF 2008 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 09th day of December, 2008 J U D G M E N T This appeal preferred against the award of Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal, Ernakulam in O.P.(M.V) 2499/2001. The claimant sustained injuries in a road accident and he has been awarded compensation of Rs.49,000/- and the insurance company was exonerated from the liability. It is against that decision the claimant has come up in appeal. 2. The first question to be considered is regarding exoneration of the liability of the insurance company, Admittedly, the claimant was a pillion rider. It is contended by the insurance company that as no additional premium was collected, and so the policy does not cover the risk of a pillion rider and therefore insurance company is to be exonerated from the liability in the light of the decision in The United India Insurance Co. Ltd. V. Tilak Singh and others [(2006)4 SCC 404]. A perusal of paragraph 10 of the award would reveal that the policy is a comprehensive MACA 2037/08 : 2 : policy. It is true that all comprehensive policies do not cover the risk of pillion riders. But when there are conditions attached to the comprehensive policies, whereby a person carried in a motor vehicle other than for hire or reward is included the insurance company cannot get exonerated from the liability. The policy conditions being so, the insurance company cannot get out of the liability. The very same clause came up for consideration before the Division Bench of this Court in the decision reported in The New India Assurance Company Ltd V Hydrose and others [2008 (3) KHC 522 (DB)]. The Division Bench held that when there is specific clause, liability has to be fastened on the insurance company. Therefore, I hold that insurance company is liable and finding of the Tribunal is set aside. 3. The next question is regarding compensation. The claimant has lost 9 teeth in the accident besides fracture of the maxillary sinus. He has only claimed Rs. 20,000/ for bridging the lost teeth. When teeth is lost and compensation is awarded per tooth, it will be much more than that what has been claimed for bridging the same. Therefore, I allow additional compensation of MACA 2037/08 : 3 : Rs.10,000/- (Rupee Ten thousand only) in this case as claimed. 4. In the result : MACA is allowed and the claimant is awarded an additional compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) with 7.5% interest on the said sum from the date of petition till realisation. The insurance company is directed to deposit the said amount within 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of judgment. It is made clear, finding in the tribunals award exonerating the insurance company from the liability is vacated and it is made clear that the insurance company is liable to pay the entire compensation. Disposed of accordingly. (M. N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE) KMD