IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 18TH DECEMBER 2009 / 27TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 MACA.No. 2429 of 2008() ----------------------- OPMV.2151/2002 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, PERUMBAVOOR .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONER ------------------------ ALIYAR, S/O.KHADER, THOPPILLY HOUSE, MARAMPILLY, N.VAZHAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. IBRAHIMKUTTY.T.A, THOOPPILLY HOUSE, MARAMPILLY, N.VAZHAKKULAM. 2. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD, VADAKKANETHIL TOWERS, NEAR PRIVATE BUS STAND, PERUMBAVOOR 683 542. ADV. SRI.E.V.RAJI KUMAR FOR R1 SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMAN & P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = == == = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 2429 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = DATED THIS, THE 18TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2009. J U D G M E N T Ramachandra Menon, J. The claimant, while travelling as a pillion rider on the motor cycle bearing No. KL-7/A-4697, sustained injuries when the motor cycle overturned on 28.8.2002, which led to the claim. The first respondent was the owner-cum rider of the motor cycle and the second respondent was the insurer of the vehicle. The owner-cum rider did not choose to contest the matter and was set ex parte. The matter was contested only by the insurer. The claimant was examined as P.W.1 and Exts. A1 to A5 were produced from his side, while the respondents chose to produce only a copy of the policy - Ext. B1 and no oral evidence was adduced from their side. 2. It is seen that the insurer was permitted to contest the matter on wider grounds by virtue of the permission given under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act, as specifically taken note of in paragraph 8 of the Award. The main contention raised by the insurer was that the policy issued was an 'Act only policy' and that no additional premium had been MACA 2429/08 2 collected in respect of the pillion rider. On the basis of the evidence adduced, the Tribunal arrived at a finding that the accident occurred because of the negligence on the part of the first respondent. After considering the various facts and figures with regard to fixation of quantum, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 86,130/- distributed under various heads as mentioned in Para 9 of the Award. The said amount was directed to be satisfied by the 'Insured' with interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of application till 30.6.2007 and thereafter at the rate of 7.5% per annum till realisation. The Tribunal absolved the Insurance Company, based on the contention raised from their side, that the policy was an 'Act only policy' and that there was no wider coverage in view of the law declared by the Apex Court in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Tilak Singh (2006(2) KLT 884). 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the observation made by the Tribunal that the policy issued was an 'Act only policy' is thoroughly wrong and misconceived. Learned counsel submits that the policy was a 'package policy' and a copy of the same along with the schedule is placed for consideration by this Court during the course of hearing. On going through Ext.B1, the copy of the policy and schedule, it is seen that the policy has been described as a 'package policy' and it is not MACA 2429/08 3 an 'Act only policy' since the insured has sought to cover not only the third party liability, but also for providing wider coverage in respect of own damage to the vehicle and also increased third party property damage beyond the statutory extent. This by itself shows that the contention raised by the Insurer and the inference arrived at by the Tribunal that the policy was an 'Act only policy', thus absolving the insurer is not correct or proper. 4. Coming to the liability of the Insurer under a 'package policy', the learned counsel appearing for the Insurer submits that the Insurance Regulatory And Development Authority has very recently issued a circular (Ref: IRDA/NL/CIR/F&U/073/11/2009 dated 16th November, 2009) making it clear that all insurers will have to satisfy the liability towards the passengers in private vehicles including pillion rider of a two wheeler under a 'package policy', a copy of which has been placed for perusal of this Court. In view of the above submission, this Court finds that the Award passed by the Tribunal exonerating the Insurer from the liability is not correct or proper and that the Insurer is very much liable to satisfy the Award. We find that the amount awarded by the Tribunal under various heads taking note of the injuries and consequences resulted as discussed in Paragraph 10 under Issue No.2 are very much adequate and it does not call MACA 2429/08 4 for any modification or enhancement. 5. In the above facts and circumstances, we make it clear that the amounts awarded by the Tribunal with interest is liable to be satisfied by the second respondent/Insurer. The Award passed by the Tribunal to the extent it has exonerated the Insurer from the liability is accordingly set aside. The amount as above, shall be deposited by the Insurer as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. No costs. P.R. RAMAN, (JUDGE) P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE) KNC/-