IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 6TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 15TH KARTHIKA 1930 MACA.No. 1698 of 2008(F) --------------------------------- OPMV.1286/2003 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, NEYYATTINKARA .................... APPELLANT/2ND RESPONDENT : --------------------------------------- ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM NOW REP. BY ITS ASSISTANT MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, METRO PALACE, KOCHI-18. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEWS JACOB (SR.) SRI.P.JACOB MATHEW RESPONDENTS/APPLICANT & 1ST RESPONDENT : ------------------------------------------------------------ 1. SUBHASH CHANDRAN, S/O.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR SADASIVA VILASOM., MARAYAMUTTOM PO., PERUMKADAVILA VILLAGE, NEYYATTINKARA. 2. S.SREEKUMAR, S/O.SUKUMARAN NAIR, ARAKKALATHUVILA, MARAYAMUTTOM PO., PERUMKADAVILA VILLAGE, NEYYATTINKARA. THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MACA.No. 1698 of 2008(F) ORDER ON I.A.NO.2036 OF 2008 IN M.A.C.A.NO.1698 OF 2008 DISMISSED 06.11.2008 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE -TRUE COPY- P.A. TO JUDGE pac M.N. KRISHNAN, J ----------------------- M.A.C.A.No. 1698 OF 2008 --------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Neyyattinkara in O.P.(MV) No.1286/03. The claimant, a pillion rider, sustained injuries in a road accident and he has been awarded compensation of Rs. 19,160/-. The Insurance Company has challenged the finding on the ground that no additional premium is paid and therefore in the light of the decision in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Tilak Singh [2006 (2) KLT 884], the Insurance Company is not bound to pay the amount. The Tribunal had relied upon a Full Bench decision of this Court and negatived the contention of the Insurance Company. Even if otherwise it is a comprehensive policy wherein there is a condition under Section II(1)(i) which 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. This clause came up for consideration before the Division Bench of this Court in the decision reported in New India Assurance Company Ltd. v. Hydrose and others [2008 (3) KHC 522]. In the said decision M.A.C.A.No. 1698/2008 -2- the Division Bench held that virtue of conditions of the policy the Company has undertaken to cover a person carried in a vehicle other than for hire or reward and so the Insurance Company is bound to indemnify. Therefore in the light of the said decision the Insurance Company cannot get exonerated from the liability. Therefore the M.A.C.A lacks merit and dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE vkm