IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MACA.No. 2106 of 2008()
1. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD.,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. SHANAVAS, S/O. ALIYARUKUNJU,
... Respondent
2. VIJAYAN, S/O. VAUDEVAN, BALAKRISHANA
For Petitioner :SRI.VPK.PANICKER
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN
Dated :06/11/2008
O R D E R
M.N. KRISHNAN, J.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = =
M.A.C.A. NO. 2106 OF 2008
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated this the 6th day of November, 2008.
J U D G M E N T
This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Neyyattinkara in O.P.(MV)
1434/02. The claimant, a pillion rider, sustained injuries in a
road accident and the Tribunal has awarded a compensation
of Rs.78,350/-. The contention of the insurance company is
to the effect that as no additional premium is paid for the
coverage of a pillion rider in the light of the dictum laid down
in Tilak Singh’s case [United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
v. Tilak Singh (2006 (2) KLT 884(SC) it is not bound to
indemnify the owner.
It can be seen from the award itself that Ext.P1 policy is
a comprehensive policy. Conditions are attached to a
comprehensive policy of which clause II (1)(i) indicates that
the insurance company has undertaken to cover the risk of a
person travelling in a motor vehicle other than for hire or
reward. The very same clause came up for consideration
M.A.C.A. 2106 OF 2008
-:2:-
before a Division Bench of this Court reported in New India
Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Hydrose [2008 (3) KHC 522(DB).
In the said decision this Court held that since the condition of
the policy envisages and takes in such a person the
insurance company cannot get exonerated from the liability.
Therefore there is nothing to interfere with the decision
rendered by Tribunal even though it is on a different reason.
Hence the appeal lacks merit and it is dismissed.
M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE.
ul/-