Back
1998 Supreme(Kar) 114
High Court Of Karnataka
C.N.Aswathanarayana Rao, J.
National Insurance Company Limited - Appellant
Versus
Honappa – Respondent
Miscellaneous First Appeal 43 of 1990
Decided On : Feb 23, 1998
I.R.Biradar, K.P.Bindu Kumar, M.Sowri Raju, R.Narayana.
The commencement of the insurance risk is deemed to occur from the zero hour of the renewal date, as established by legal precedents.
Headnote:
Insurance - Liability - Commencement of Risk
Fact of the Case:
The insurer appealed on the question of liability due to an accident that occurred outside the insurance policy period but was renewed after the accident without disclosure.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the risk is deemed to have commenced from the zero hour of the renewal date, based on legal precedents and the absence of a contrary view.
Issues: The issue was whether the insurance company was liable to indemnify the owner for an accident that occurred outside the policy period but was renewed without disclosure.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on legal precedents to determine that the risk commenced from the zero hour of the renewal date, holding the insurance company liable.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the insurance company was held liable to pay the compensation amount.
1. THIS is an insurer's appeal on the question of liability. The accident took place at 2. 30 a. m. on the night between 5-2-1994 and 6-2-1994. The insurance policy was in effect till 21-9-1984 and had not been renewed subsequently. After the accident, during office hours on 6-2-1994 the owner went to the insurance company, paid the premium and obtained a fresh insurance policy without disclosing the happening of the accident. The insurance company contended before the tribunal that the risk commenced only when the premium was paid during office hours and therefore it is not liable to indemnify the owner with regard to the accident which took place at 2. 30 a. m. the tribunal refused to accept that contention and held that under the law the risk is deemed to have commenced from the zero hour of 6-2-1984 and therefore held that the insurance company is liable to pay the compensation amount. Being aggrieved this appeal is preferred.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The tribunal, in support of its view, has relied upon two decisions. In 1985 accidents and compensation cases 81, a division bench of the Madras High Court held that the policy is deemed to cover from the midnight of the date on which it is issued. In 1987 accidents and compensation cases 33, the Punjab and Haryana High Court held that if the insurance policy is obtained on the same day after the accident, it operates from the previous midnight and therefore the insurance company would be liable. The tribunal has rightly followed the reasonings in these two decisions. The learned counsel for the appellant was unable to bring to my notice any decision which has taken a contrary view. In view of the prevailing legal position, it cannot be said that the tribunal has wrongly fastened the liability on the insurance company. There is no merit in this appeal and it is liable to be dismissed.
The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that there are judgments to show that if the insurance company had put the time at the time of renewal, then the risk would cover only from the time of renewal and not earlier. Accepting this argument, it is seen from the facts on hand no such time has been put on the insurance policy. Therefore this argument does not come to the aid of the appellant in this case.
3. FOR the reasons aforesaid, the appeal is dismissed. Parties to bear their own costs.
