Tomy John vs Jayesh K.K on 22 October, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MACA.No. 1530 of 2010()


1. TOMY JOHN, KARIMTHOLIL HOUSE,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. JAYESH K.K.
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANACE CO.LTD,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.V.ELIAS

                For Respondent  :SMT.S.JAYASREE

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

 Dated :22/10/2010

 O R D E R
                    M.N. KRISHNAN, J.
              = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
                M.A.C.A. NO. 1530 OF 2010
            = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
       Dated this the 22nd day of October, 2010.

                     J U D G M E N T

This appeal is preferred against the award of the

Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Muvattupuzha in O.P.

(MV)1189/04. The claimant, a pillion rider, sustained

injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal awarded him

a compensation of Rs.43,300/- and the insurance

company has been exonerated from the liability. It is

against that decision challenging the quantum and

exoneration of the liability the claimant has come up in

appeal.

2. Heard. A perusal would reveal that the

contention of the appellant is that the vehicle is covered

by a comprehensive or package policy. The nature of

the policy is not seen stated clearly in the written

M.A.C.A. 1530 OF 2010
-:2:-

statement nor in the award. What is stated is that no

additional premium is collected and therefore the

insurance company is not liable. By virtue of the

clarificatory circular issued by the Insurance Regulatory

and Development Authority dated 16.11.2009 coupled

with the two Division Bench decisions of this Court

reported in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v.

Hydrose (2008 (3) KLT 778) and Mathew v. Shaji

Mathew (2009 (3) KLT 813) if it is a comprehensive

or a package policy a pillion rider will be covered. So I

think the matter requires reconsideration. Since the

matter requires reconsideration I direct the Tribunal to

reconsider the quantum awarded and for this purpose

both the sides are permitted to adduce evidence both

documentary as well as oral, to substantiate their

contentions. Irrespective of the finding I make it clear

M.A.C.A. 1530 OF 2010
-:3:-

that the claimant will not be entitled to get any interest

for the period from 14.3.08 till 6.8.10 because of the

delay he has caused in filing the appeal. Parties are

directed to appear before the Tribunal on 23.11.10.

Sd/-

M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE.

ul/-

[true copy]

P.A. To Judge.