IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 14TH DECEMBER 2009 / 23RD AGRAHAYANA 1931 MACA.No. 2238 of 2007(C) ------------------------------------- O.P(MV).NO.1584/2001 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, KOLLAM. .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ------------------------------------- KAMALUDEEN, S/O.BADARUDEEN, KUTTIKKADU VEEDU, KUTTICHIRA, KILIKOLLOOR, KOLLAM. BY ADV. MR.PRATHEESH.P. RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------------------- 1. SHAHABUDEEN, SHAFIK MANZIL, KUTTICHIRA, KILIKOLLOOR P.O., KOLLAM. * 2. SHAJAHAN, S/O.MYTHEENKUNJU RAWTHER, NADEERA MANZIL, KILIKOLLOOR, KOLLAM. 3. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., HOSPITAL ROAD, KOLLAM. *R2 IS DELETED FROM THE PARTY ARRAY VIDE ORDER DATED 14/12/2009 IN I.A. NO. 3433/09. R1 BY ADV. MR.K.SIJU, R3 BY ADV. MR.RAJAN P.KALIYATH. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/12/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.No.2238 OF 2007 ............................................. Dated this the 14th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Kollam in OP(MV)No.1584/2001.The claimant, a pillion rider, sustained injuries in a road accident and he has been awarded a compensation of Rs.50,540/= and the insurance company has been exonerated from the liability and the 1st respondent is made liable for the amount. It is against the quantum, the claimant has come up in appeal. 2. The owner had also entered before this Court and had shown me a copy of the policy which is a comprehensive policy. But the policy is not readable with respect to the number. But if the policy is a comprehensive/package policy, in the light of the circular issued by the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority, the insurance company cannot take the defence of non coverage because in the circular it is made clear that the insured's liability in respect of occupants carried in a private car and a pillion rider carried : 2 : M.A.C.A.No.2238 OF 2007 in a two wheeler is covered under the standard motor package policy. So, this is a matter which requires consideration. Over and above this, two decisions of this Court reported in New India Assurance Co. Ltd.v. Hydrose (2008(3) KLT 778)and in Mathew v. Shaji Mathew (2009 (3) KLT 813) also throw light on this subject. So, the matter requires consideration so far as it relates to the liability of the insurance company is concerned. As the matter has to go back, I give an opportunity to the claimant to put forward any new evidence available or produce materials before the court to show about the inadequacy of compensation. That also can be considered by the Tribunal. 3. In the result, the MACA is allowed and the award under challenge is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Tribunal for the purpose of deciding whether the insurance company is liable and whether the claimant is entitled to get the enhanced compensation. For this purpose, all concerned be permitted to adduce documentary as well as oral evidence in support of their respective contentions and then dispose of the matter in accordance with law. The : 3 : M.A.C.A.No.2238 OF 2007 parties are directed to appear before the Tribunal on 18.01.2010 Disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 4 : M.A.C.A.No.2238 OF 2007