JUDGMENT

A.M. Ahmadi, CJI. -  A Maruti car with Registration No. CHK-9253 was purchased in the name of Mrs. Archana Wadhwa for which the respondent, M/s. New India Assurance Company Ltd., had issued a comprehensive insurance policy. The premium for the insurance was paid by the appellant Company in whose favour the car was transferred. The registration of the car was transferred to the appellant on 15-6-1989. On 26-6-1989, the appellant intimated the transfer of registration and asked for transfer of the insurance policy. A reminder was sent on 24-7-1989. The respondent did not reply to the two letters. On 17-9-1989 the car met with a serious accident in which the Managing Director of the appellant suffered serious injuries and his sister died. On 11-10-1989 the appellant asked for the assessment of the damage as the car was a total loss. The respondent did not respond. A reminder dated 26-12-1989 met the same fate. The appellant got a notice issued to which the respondent replied that the appellant had no insurable interest in the car. The appellant filed the complaint before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh, which directed the respondent to pay Rs. 83,000 i.e., the insured value of the vehicle, as the vehicle was a total loss, along with costs and interest. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission set aside the order of the Commission at Chandigarh, dismissed the complaint and granted of the appeal. Hence the appeal.

2. The moot question involved in the case is whether on the above facts, without the insurance policy being transferred in the name of the appellant, it was entitled to be indemnified by the insurer. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission held that under Section 157 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, (hereinafter called "the New Act") a certificate of insurance is deemed to have been transferred in favour of the person to the whom the vehicle is transferred but that the said provision applied only in relation to third-party risk and did not apply to a policy covering risk of damage to the vehicle or person of the insured. The National Commission placed reliance on a judgment of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Madineni Kondaiah v. Yaseen Fatima.

3. Before proceeding further it is necessary to examine the provisions of Section 103-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, hereinafter called old Act and Section 157 of the new Act, in juxtaposition :

OLD ACT

"103-A. Transfer of Certificate of Insurance. - (1) Where a person in whose favour the certificate of insurance has been issued in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter proposes to transfer to another person the ownership of the motor vehicle in respect of which such insurance was taken together with the policy of insurance relating thereto, he may apply in the prescribed form to the insurer for the transfer of the certificate of insurance and the policy described in the certificate in favour of the person to whom the motor vehicle is proposed to be transferred, and if within fifteen days of the receipt of such application by the insurer, the insurer has not intimated the insured and such other person his refusal to transfer the certificate and the policy to the other person, the certificate of insurance and the policy described in the certificate shall be deemed to have been transferred in favour of the person to whom the motor vehicle is transferred with effect from the date of its transfer.

(2) The insurer to whom any application has been made under sub-section (1) may refuse to transfer to the other person the certificate of insurance and the policy described in that certificate, if he considers it necessary so to do, having regard to -

(a) the previous conduct of the other person, -

(i) as a driver of motor vehicles; or

(ii) as a holder of the policy of insurance in respect of any motor vehicle; or

(b) any conditions which may have been imposed in relation to any such policy held by the applicant; or

(c) the