IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 26TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 4TH ASWINA 1930 MACA.No. 1142 of 2007(F) --------------------------------- OPMV.867/2003 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MUVATTUPUZHA .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT NO.3 : ---------------------------------------- M/S. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., MUNICIPAL SHOPPING COMPLEX, KACHERITHAZHAM, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.S.MAMMU RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND REPONDENTS NO.1 AND 2 : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. C.P. PAULOSE, CHANDALAKKATTIL HOUSE, VALAKOM VILLAGE, MEKKADUMBU KARA. 2. JAIKISHAN M., KANIYAMKULANGARA, MEKKADUMBU P.O., MUVATTUPUZHA. 3. NARAYANAN K., KANIYAMKULANGARA, MEKKADUMBU P.O., MUVATTUPUZHA. ADV. SRI.P.V.ELIAS - R1 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MACA.No. 1142 of 2007(F) ORDER ON I.A.NO.1279 OF 2007 IN M.A.C.A NO.1142 OF 2007 DISMISSED 26.09.2008 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE -TRUE COPY- P.A. TO JUDGE pac M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------ M.A.C.A. No.1142 of 2007 ------------------------------ Dated this the 26th day of September, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal , Muvattupuzha in O.P.(MV) No. 867 of 2003. The Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.58,220/- with 7% interest and Insurance Company has been directed to pay the amount. Aggrieved by the quantum as well as the liability, the Insurance Company has come up in appeal. 2. Heard the counsel of both sides. So far as the liability of Insurance Company is concerned, it has been considered by the Tribunal in Para 12 of the award. The conditions of the policy is extracted as follows: “subject to the Limits of liability the Company will indemnify the insured in the event of accident caused by or arising out of the use of Motor Cycle against all sums including claimant's cost and expenses which the insured shall become legally liable to pay M.A.C.A. No.1142/2007 2 in respect of a) death or bodily injury to any person including person conveyed in or on the Motor Cycle provided such person is not carried for hire or reward.” 3. The policy is a comprehensive policy. The conditions of the policy takes in coverage of death or bodily injury to any person including person conveyed in or on the Motor Cycle provided such person is not carried for hire or reward. There is no case that the pillion rider was carried for hire or reward. The very same clause came up for interpretation before the Division Bench of this Court in the decision in New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Hydrose and Others reported in [2008(3) K.H.C.522] wherein, this court held that “the Insurance Company has by contract agreed to indemnify the insured of the risk of gratuitous passenger in the motor cycle. In the above circumstances, we are of the opinion that Tribunal has correctly held that Insurance Company is liable to pay the amount, and hence, this appeal is dismissed.” In the light of the said pronouncement, the M.A.C.A. No.1142/2007 3 finding of the Tribunal does not call for any inference. So far as the quantum is concerned, though the disability certificate was issued showing percent of disability at 15%, the Tribunal only accepted 5% and took the monthly income at Rs.2,000/- applied the multiplier of 8 and awarded the compensation and an amount of Rs.26,120/- towards medical expenses. Therefore, taking into consideration the nature of injury, it has to be held that the compensation awarded is also proper. Therefore, the award passed by the Tribunal does not call for any inference and the appeal is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE scm