High Court Kerala High Court

National Insurance Company Ltd vs Ummer on 19 May, 2010

Kerala High Court
National Insurance Company Ltd vs Ummer on 19 May, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

MACA.No. 3009 of 2008()


1. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. UMMER, S/O. UMMAD MUSLIAR,
                       ...       Respondent

2. P.A. MUKTHAR, S/O. AHAMMED,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.RAJAN P.KALIYATH

                For Respondent  :SRI.T.A.SHAIN

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

 Dated :19/05/2010

 O R D E R
                       M.N. KRISHNAN, J.
               = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
                 M.A.C.A. NO. 3009 OF 2008
              = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
           Dated this the 19th day of May, 2010.

                        J U D G M E N T

This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor

Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thrissur in O.P.(MV)850/03. The

claimant, a pillion rider sustained injuries in a road accident

and the Tribunal awarded him a compensation of Rs.30,600/-.

The insurance company has come up in appeal challenging

the liability.

2. It is brought to my notice that the vehicle is

covered by a package policy. When it is a package policy by

virtue of the clarificatory circular dated 16.11.2009 issued by

the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority the

persons carried in a private vehicle and persons carried in a

two wheeler are covered under the terms and conditions of

Standard Motor Package Policy. Similarly, two Division

Benches of this Court in the decisions reported in New India

Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Hydrose (2008 (3) KLT 778) and

Mathew v. Shaji Mathew (2009 (3) KLT 813) has laid

down that the terms and conditions of the policy cover the

M.A.C.A. 3009 OF 2008
-:2:-

risk of a pillion rider. Therefore by virtue of the clarificatory

Circular as well as by virtue of the decisions referred to above

it has to be held that the insurance company is bound to pay

the amount. Hence there is nothing to interfere with the

decision rendered by the Tribunal. So the appeal lacks merit

and the same is dismissed.

Sd/-

M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE.

ul/-

[true copy]

P.A. To Judge.