IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2010 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 MACA.No. 1480 of 2008 ------------------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 31/01/2007 IN ORDER IN OPMV.890/2002 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT/2ND RESPONDENT: ---------------------------------------------------- UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., REP.BY ITS DEPUTY MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, SHARANYA, HOSPITAL ROAD, KOCHI 11. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & IST RESPONDENT RESPECTIVELY: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. ASOKAN, S/O.RAMAN, PANICKAN VILA VEEDU, MUKKOLA, KALLAYAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. S.SURESH, S/O.SUKUMARAN, AMPOLI VEEDU, KADAKAVOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.SANTHAN V.NAIR FOR R2 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C.M.Appln.No.1461 OF 2008 & M.A.C.A.No.1480 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 1st day of December 2010 JUDGMENT Basheer, J. Appellant is the insurer of a two wheeler which was involved in a road traffic accident. The victim who suffered certain injuries was a pillion rider on the above vehicle. He claimed compensation from the owner of the vehicle and its insurer for the injuries sustained by him. 2. It was contended by the appellant before the Tribunal that the policy did not cover the risk of a pillion rider. Nevertheless the Tribunal directed the appellant to indemnify the owner and pay a sum of Rs.80,250/- towards compensation with 7.5% interest. 3. The above award is under challenge in this appeal which has been filed with a delay of 97 days. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are satisfied that the delay can be condoned. We do so. 4. Learned Senior Counsel who appears for the appellant submits that in view of the clarification issued by the Insurance Regulatory Development Authority, the policy which was issued in M.A.C.A.No.1480 OF 2008 :: 2 :: respect of the vehicle involved in the accident would cover the pillion rider also. In other words, the learned Senior Counsel submits that the appellant would be liable to indemnify the owner/insured. In that view of the matter, there is no merit in the appeal. Accordingly, it is dismissed. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE jes