UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. BABY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred against the award of the Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kot-tayam in O.P. (MV) No. 1036 of 2003. The claimant therein was a pillion rider on a motor cycle bearing registration No. KL 5-L 1161. The insurance company has raised a contention that the pillion rider is not covered by the policy as no additional premium is paid. In para 12 of the award, the Tribunal found that the vehicle was covered by a valid policy. It is specifically stated therein that "going by Exh. B1 it is seen that the respondent No. 3 issued a Package Policy in respect of the vehicle belonging to the respondent No. 2". The Tribunal on a consideration of the materials found that the insurance company is liable to pay the amount and it is against that decision that the insurance company has come up in appeal.

(2.) Now it is clearly well settled by virtue of the clarificatory circular issued by the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority dated 16.11.2009 that the passengers carried in a private vehicle and the persons travelling on a two-wheeler are covered under the terms and conditions of the Standard Motor Package Policy. Further, the clause in the package policy came up for consideration before two Division Benches of this court in the decisions New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Hydrose, 2009 ACJ 416 and in Mathew v. Shaji Mathew, 2010 ACJ 322. In both these decisions, the Division Benches took the view that the terms and conditions of a Package Policy cover the risk of a pillion rider and, therefore, no additional premium is necessary. Therefore in the light of the clarificatory circular coupled with the decisions of this court it has to be held that the insurance company is liable and, therefore, there is nothing to find against the award of the Tribunal. Therefore the appeal fails and the same is dismissed.</JSPARA>