IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 15TH OCTOBER 2009 / 23RD ASWINA 1931 MACA.No. 918 of 2009() --------------------------------- OPMV.2033/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THRISSUR .................... APPELLANT/2ND RESPONDENT --------------------------------------------- THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER,REGIONAL OFFICE, OMANA BUILDING,PADMA JUNCTION,KOCHI-35. BY ADV. SMT.RAJI T.BHASKAR RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & 1ST RESPONDENT RESPECTIVELY:- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. SHAJEERA, W/O.MUHAMMED RASHEED, PUTHUVEETTIL MADATHIPARAMBIL HOUSE, EAST NADA.PO, GURUVAYUR. 2. MOHAMMED RASHEED.P.A, S/O.P.M.ABU, PUTHUVEETTIL MADATHIPARAMBIL HOUSE, EAST NADA.PO, GURUVAYUR. R2 BY ADV. MR.P.V.CHANDRA MOHAN . THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/10/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MACA.No. 918 of 2009 ORDER ON I.A. NO.1209/2009 IN MACA NO.918/2009 CLOSED 15/10/2009. SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs. M.N.KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.NO.918 OF 2009 ............................................. Dated this the 15th day of October, 2009 J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Trichur in OP(MV)No.2033/2002.The claimant has been awarded a compensation of Rs.65,500/- and the insurance company has been directed to pay the amount. It is against that finding, the insurance company has come up in appeal. Admittedly, the policy involved is a comprehensive policy. It is true that no premium is collected for the purpose of carrying a pillion rider. In comprehensive and package policies there are conditions which hold that the insurance company undertakes to cover the risk of a person who is carried in a motor vehicle other than for hire or reward. The extended clause of 'but except so far as it is necessary to meet the requirements of the Motor Vehicle Act' also came up for consideration before a Division Bench of this Court. In New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Hydrose (2008(3) KLT 778), a Division Bench of this Court held that since there is a condition in the contract, without : 2 : M.A.C.A.NO.918 OF 2009 even payment of the additional premium, the insurance company is bound to indemnify. In the decision reported in Mathew v. Shaji Mathew (2009 (3) KLT 813) the extended clause was also considered by this Court and it was held that just because there is extended clause, it cannot defeat the benefit conferred upon a party under the Hydrose's case. So when a policy contains a specific clause whereby the insurance company undertakes to cover the risk of a person, the view of this Court is that the insurance company is bound to pay the amount. So, in the light of these authoritative pronouncements, I hold that there is nothing to interfere with the decision rendered by the Tribunal. Therefore, the appeal fails and it is dismissed. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 3 : M.A.C.A.NO.918 OF 2009