IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2008 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 MACA.No. 2343 of 2007() ---------------------------------- OPMV.769/2001 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THRISSUR .................... APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT ----------------------------------------------- NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., REP. BY ITS MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, 3RD PARTY WING, OMANA BUILDING, PADMA JUNCTION, KOCHI-35. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND RES. 1 & 2 RESPECTIVELY ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. E.K.SHAJU, S/O. KANDANKUTTY, ELAYEDATH HOUSE, VENGIDANGUE, THRISSUR. 2. SAJI K.J., S/O. JOHN K.J., KOCHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, VETTUKKAD, PUTHENKKAD, THRISSUR. 3. MR. V.R.SIVAN, MATHA AMRITHANANDAMAYI MATH, KALOOR, KOCHI. BY ADV. SRI.SHEJI P.ABRAHAM FOR R1 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MACA.No. 2343 of 2007() ORDER ON I.A.NO. 3087 OF 2007 IN MACA 2343 OF 2007 DISMISSED SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN,JUDGE 1.12.2008. // TRUE COPY // PA TO JUDGE rhs M.N. KRISHNAN, J ----------------------- M.A.C.A.No. 2343 OF 2007 --------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of December, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Thrissur in O.P.(MV) No. 769/2001. The claimant sustained injuries in a road accident and the tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs. 22,900/- and directed the Insurance Company to pay the amount. It was contended by the Insurance Company that the claimant being a pillion rider is not covered by the policy and therefore in the light of the decision reported in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Tilak Singh [2006 (2) KLT 884], the Insurance Company is not bound to pay the amount. Admittedly the policy is a comprehensive policy. The conditions of comprehensive policy namely Section II(1)(i) states that the Insurance Company is bound to indemnify the risk of a person who is carried in a motor vehicle other than for hire or reward. So in the light of the said decision as well as on the basis of the and conditions of the policy, I find that the Insurance Company is bound to indemnify. Therefore appeal lacks merit and accordingly dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN,JUDGE vkm