IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N. KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 7TH DECEMBER 2009 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 MACA.No. 1045 of 2008() ----------------------- O.P.(MV.) 317/2006 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, TIRUR .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT NO.3:- -------------------------------------- M/S.ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD., SUNDARAM TOWERS, 45 & 46 WHITES ROAD, CHENNAI-600 014, NOW OFFICE AT SORRENTO BUILDING NO.6, 1ST FLOOR, LATTICO BRIDGE ROAD, ADAYAR, CHENNAI-6000014. BY ADV. MR. S.MAMMU RESPONDENTS/ PETITIONERS AND RESPONDENTS NO.1 AND 2: ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. NOUSHAD, S/O.MOHAMMED, MANGATTIL HOUSE, KOTT KALLINGAL, P.O. TIRUR, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. FASALUL ABID, S/O.MAMMUTTY, KOLAMBAN HOUSE, PAZHAMKULANGARA, P.O.TIRUR, TIRUR TALUK. 3. NOUSHAD K.P., S/O.MAMMI, KUNNATH PARAMBIL HOUSE, PAN BAZAR, P.O. TIRUR, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: \ M.A.C.A. NO. 1045/2008 : 2 : ORDER ON I.A. NO. 1264/2008 IN M.A.C.A. NO. 1045/2008 DISMISSED 07.12.2009 sd/- M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. M.N. KRISHNAN, J. ........................................... M.A.C.A.No.1045 OF 2008 ............................................. Dated this the 7th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T This is an appeal preferred against the award of the Claims Tribunal, Tirur in OP(MV)No.317/2006. The claimant sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal has awarded him a compensation of Rs.85,000/= with 6% interest and the insurance company was liable to pay the amount. 2. The insurance company raised a contention that as per the policy, as no additional premium is received, the insurance company is bound to indemnify even though it is a package policy. Admittedly the vehicle involved in this case is a private car covered by a package policy. There are conditions in the package policy which would reveal that the insurance company has undertaken to cover the risk of death or bodily injury to any person including occupants carried in the vehicle provided such vehicles 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 came up for consideration before the Division : 2 : M.A.C.A.No.1045 OF 2008 Benches of this Court in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. V. Hydrose (2008 (3) KLT 778) and in Mathew v. Shaji Mathew (2009 (3) KLT 813) and as per the decisions referred to above, no additional premium is necessary and by virtue of the conditions of the policy, the passengers in a private car and pillion rider are covered by the policy. Subsequently on 16.11.2009 quoting the conditions of the policy, the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority has also issued a circular. The above circular makes it clear that the occupants carried in a private car and the pillion rider carried in a two wheeler are covered under the package policy. 3. Therefore in the light of the two authoritative pronouncements of this Court coupled with the circular issued by the authority, it has to be held that the insurance company is liable and therefore, nothing to interfere with the award. The appeal fails and it is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE cl : 3 : M.A.C.A.No.1045 OF 2008