The New India Assurance Company … vs Shaju on 25 September, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MACA.No. 1069 of 2007()


1. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. SHAJU, S/O.KUMARAN,
                       ...       Respondent

2. SAHADEVAN, S/O.CHANDRAN,

3. JITHESH K.S/O.KRISHNAN,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN

 Dated :25/09/2008

 O R D E R
                          M.N.KRISHNAN, J.
                          --------------------------
                     M.A.C.A. No. 1069 OF 2007
                            ---------------------
             Dated this the 25thday of September, 2008

                              JUDGMENT

This appeal is preferred against the award passed by the

Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Vadakara, in OP(MV) 940/02. The

claimant sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal

awarded him a compensation of Rs.22,135/- and directed the

Insurance Company to pay the amount.

2. The Insurance Company has resisted the claim on the

ground that the claimant was a pillion rider not covered by the policy

and therefore the claimant is not entitled to get any compensation

from the Insurance Company. The Tribunal found that the policy is

not an Act only policy but a comprehensive policy. In para 8 of the

award the Tribunal has observed that “the policy in respect of the

vehicle involved in this case is produced and marked as Ext.B1. A

perusal of Ext.B1 will reveal that it is a comprehensive policy and

there is specific clause to the effect that it covers the death or bodily

injury to any person including the person conveyed in the motor cycle

provided such person is not carried for hire or reward. There is no

MACA No. 1069/07
2

case for R3 that the petitioner was travelling in the vehicle on hire or

reward.” This clause came up for interpretation before the Division

Bench of this court in the decision reported in New India Assurance

Co. ltd. v. Hydrose and Ors. [2008 (3) KHC 522 (DB)]. It was held

therein that such conditions will cover the risk of a person travelling in

the bike and therefore held that the Insurance Company is liable to

indemnify. In the light of this decision and on the basis of the terms

and conditions of the policy, I also hold that the Insurance Company

is bound to indemnify.

Therefore, the appeal lacks merit and it is accordingly

dismissed.

M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE
vps

MACA No. 1069/07
3