IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH JANUARY 2010 / 7TH MAGHA 1931 MACA.No. 1542 of 2009() --------------------------------- OPMV.375/2006 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, VADAKARA .................... APPELLANT(S): 3RD RESPONDENT ---------------------------- THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., REP.BY ITS MANAGER,REGIONAL OFFICE, OMANA BUILDING,PADMA JUNCTION,KOCHI-35. BY ADV. SMT.RAJI T.BHASKAR RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER & RESPONDENT 1 & 2 RESPECTIVELY -------------------------- 1. VINOD,S/O.CHANDRAN,AGED 36/'06, MAKKANAM THURUTHI HOUSE,VIYYUR AMSOM DESOM, P.O.KOLLAM,QUILANDY TALUK,KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. R.C.OWNER (KL-2-K-4170/MOTORCYCLE), M.T.ARUN JYOTHI,S/O.KUMARAN,AGE NOT KNOWN, 'JYOTHIS',VIYYUR P.O.,KOLLAM,QUILANDY. 3. DRIVER (KL-2-K-4170/MOTORCYCLE), SISANTH,S/O.SIVADASN,AGED 24/'06, MAKKANAMTHURUTHI HOUSE,VIYYUR AMSOM,DESOM, P.O.KOLLAM,QUILANDY,DL.NO.3458/VK/02, VALID FROM 15-11-'02 TO 14-11-2022. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON IA. NO.1828/2009 IN MACA. NO.1542/2009 DISMISSED 27/01/2010 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.No.1542 OF 2009 ............................................. Dated this the 27th day of January, 2010. J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Vatakara in OP(MV)No.375/2007. The question that arises for determination is regarding the liability of the insurance company. The insurance company contended that as no additional premium is paid, the principles laid down in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Tilak Singh [(2006 (2) KLT 884 (SC)] have to be extended and therefore the insurance company will not be liable. The Tribunal found that the policy issued is a comprehensive policy and by virtue of the decisions in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Hydrose (2008 (3) KLT 778), the insurance company is bound to pay. It is challenging the same, the insurance company has come up in appeal. 2. Now by virtue of a clarificatory circular issued by the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority dated 16.11.2009 it is clarified that the passengers carried in a private vehicle and pillion riders travelling in two wheelers : 2 : M.A.C.A.No.1542 OF 2009 are covered by the terms of the standard motor package policy. The conditions of the policy are also extracted in the above clarificatory circular. The above clause has come up for consideration before the two Division Benches of this Court in the decisions reported in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Hydrose (2008 (3) KLT 778) and in Mathew v. Shaji Mathew (2009 (3) KLT 813). It is laid down in those decisions that when the terms and conditions of the contract cover the risk , then no additional premium is necessary. 3. Therefore, by virtue of the clarificatory circular coupled with the decisions of this Court, I cannot find fault with the Tribunal for fixing the liability on the insurance company. Therefore the appeal lacks merit and the same is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 3 : M.A.C.A.No.1542 OF 2009