The policy of the Supreme Court is to enforce strictly an insurance contract in accordance with the meaning of its unambiguous terms, even in those instances where the court's sympathy may avowedly rest with an unfortunate claimant precluded recovery by that strictness of policy. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Sewell, 223 Ga. 31 (153 SE2d 432). This court, also, must confine itself to the truth that insurance is a matter of contract--not sympathy. Pilot Lee Ins. Co. v. Stephens, 97 Ga. App. 529 (103 SE2d 651). It appearing from the stipulations of the parties that the expenses claimed were incurred for treatments administered after the expiration of unambiguous time limitations stated in the policy, the judgment of the trial court in favor of the defendant is