IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 11TH DECEMBER 2009 / 20TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 MACA.No. 753 of 2007() --------------------------- OPMV.1117/2000 of ADDL.MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM ................. APPELLANT(S): APELLANT/PETITIONER ------------------------------------------- SREEKUMARAN NAIR, S/O.GOPALA PILLAI, AGED 51 YEARS, LAKSHMI VILASAM, PADINJAREMURI, VMC WARD NO.3, POOTHALAPPADY, KANNANTHODE, VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.ANIL S.RAJ SMT.MANJUSHA MOHANDAS SMT.ANILA PETER RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS ------------------------------------- 1. GEORGE KURIAKOSE, PAZHEMADATHIL HOUSE, VELLAKAM P.O., VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM. 2. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, BRANCH OFFICE, THRIPPUNITHURA. ADV. MR.P.JAYASANKAR FOR R2 MR.MATHEW PHILIP EDAPPALLIL FOR ADDL.R3,R4 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------ M.A.C.A. No. 753 OF 2007 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 11th day of December, 2009 JUDGMENT This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam in O.P(M.V) No.1117/2000. The claimant was traveling in a private car and when they reached the place of accident, the car dashed against the speed breaker and thereby resulting in sustainment of injuries, in O.P(M.V)No.1117/2000 and death of another person. 2. The Tribunal, after considering the entire materials, awarded compensation of Rs.17,021/- and negatived the liability of the Insurance Company on the ground that the policy does not cover the risk of a private passenger in a comprehensive policy. The arguments were raised on the ground that as no additional premium is paid to cover the passenger in a car it is not liable. The Hon'ble Apex Court M.A.C.A. No. 753 OF 2007 2 in Tilak Singh's held that the status of the pillion rider is not that of a third party, but of a gratuitous passenger and therefore the terms and conditions of an 'Act Only' policy does not cover the risk of a pillion rider. The same principle has been extended to an 'Act Only' policy issued to a private car and therefore it is submitted that the policy will not cover the risk of a passenger. 3. But so far as this case is concerned, the car is covered by a comprehensive policy. In comprehensive policy there are conditions which makes it clear that the Insurance Company has undertaken to cover the amount due from the insured in case of death or bodily injury to any person including occupants carried in a vehicle. “(Provided such occupants are not carried for hire or reward) but except so far as it is necessary to meet the requirements of the Motor Vehicles Act”. These clauses have come up for consideration before two Division Benches of this Court M.A.C.A. No. 753 OF 2007 3 reported in (2008 (3) KLT 878 and 2009 (3) KLT 813, New India Assurance Company Vs. Hydrose and another and Mathew Vs. Shaji Mathew) 4. After considering the clause the Court held that by virtue of the terms and conditions of the policy under the Insurance contract, the company has undertaken to cover of the risk of any person carried in a motor vehicle and therefore by virtue of the same it is liable to pay the amount. The very clause was considered also by the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority and they had issued a clarificatory circular dated 16.11.2009, wherein it is stated that the Insurers' liability in respect of occupants carried in a private car and pillion rider carried on two wheeler is covered under the Standard Motor Package Policy. 5. Therefore by virtue of the two authoritative M.A.C.A. No. 753 OF 2007 4 pronouncements and the clarificatory circular, the passengers traveling in private car are covered by a comprehensive policy and therefore the Insurance Company is liable to pay the amount. Therefore the finding of the Tribunal that the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the amount is set aside and it is made liable to pay. 6. In the result, M.A.C.A is partly allowed and the finding that Insurance Company is not liable is set aside and it is made liable to pay and hereby directed to deposit the amount awarded within a period of 60 days from the date of the receipt of copy of this judgment. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE /ss/