JUDGMENT : M.N. Krishnan, J. 1. This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Vadakara in O.P. (MV) No. 901 of 2003. The claimant, a pillion rider sustained injuries in a road accident and the Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 28,181. It is against that decision, the insurance company has come up in appeal. 2. Heard the learned Counsel for the respondents as well as learned Counsel for the insurance company. Learned Counsel for the insurance company would contend that as per the policy as no wider premium is paid for coverage of a pillion rider, it is not liable to indemnify the owner and, therefore, it is to be exonerated from the liability. On the other hand, the Tribunal, relying on the policy conditions which is a comprehensive policy held that as per the conditions, the person travelling on the motorbike is also covered by the policy unless he is carried for hire or reward. The very same clause came up for consideration before a Division Bench of this Court in New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Hydrose 2009 ACJ 416 (Kerala). This Court held that when there are specific conditions in the policy which takes in the person travelling on the motorbike the insurance company is bound by the terms of the contract to indemnify the insured. So I do not find any mistake committed by the Tribunal in arriving at a decision and, therefore, the appeal lacks merit and the same is dismissed.