PATNA HIGH COURT
B.P.Jha and Lalit Mohan Sharma JJ.
Life Insurance Corporation Of India, Bombay
Versus
Ramdas Agarwal
Appeal from Original Decree No. 521 of 1972 ;
Decided On : MAY 4, 1978
LIFE INSURANCE - REVIVAL OF LAPSED POLICY - WAIVER OF INTEREST - ACCEPTANCE OF PREMIUM AFTER LAPSE - ESTOPPEL BY CONDUCT - MEDICAL REPORT - DELAY IN SUBMISSION.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiff, son of the deceased policyholder, filed a suit against the Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) seeking recovery of the assured sum under a life insurance policy. The policy had lapsed due to non-payment of premium within the grace period. The plaintiff claimed that the policy was revived by the assured during his lifetime and that the LIC had waived the interest due on the unpaid premiums.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the policy was revived by the assured as he fulfilled the conditions laid down in the policy. The assured had obtained a medical certificate from a doctor of the LIC and had paid the interest due on the unpaid premiums. The court also held that the LIC had waived the right to realize the interest by accepting the premiums even after the policy had lapsed.
Issues: 1. Whether the policy was revived by the assured during his lifetime? 2. Whether the LIC had waived the interest due on the unpaid premiums?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the policy was revived by the assured as he had obtained a medical certificate from a doctor of the LIC and had paid the interest due on the unpaid premiums. The court relied on the principle of waiver, holding that the LIC had abandoned its right to realize the interest by accepting the premiums even after the policy had lapsed. 2. The court held that the LIC had waived the interest due on the unpaid premiums by accepting the premiums even after the policy had lapsed.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal filed by the LIC and upheld the judgment of the trial court, which had decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff.
B.P.JHA, J.
1. The Life Insurance Corporation of India (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation) preferred an appeal against the judgement dated 14th Feb., 1972 in Money Suit No. 40 of 1969.
2. Ramdas Agrawal, being the son of Babulal Agrawal, instituted a suit for recovery of Rs. 12,980.00 from the Corporation. Babulal Agrawal, the father of the plaintiff, submitted a propose for insurance of his life. The sum assured in the policy was Rs. 11,000/-. The Corporation accepted the propose of Babulal Agrawal and issued life insurance policy no. 10402073 dated 28th August, 1963. Babulal was required to pay premium each year on 18th April. The grace period prescribed in the policy (Ext. 1) was thirty days. If the premium was not paid within the grace period, the policy would lapse. A condition in the policy was that the policy could be revived during the lifetime a the Life Assured within a period of five years from the due date of the first unpaid premium and before the date of maturity. It is said that the assured died on 11th Sept. 1967. Before his death, he paid five premiums. It is for this reason the plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of the sum assured, that is, Rs. 11,000.00 plus interest thereon.
3. The suit was resisted by the Corporation on the ground that the plaintiff was not entitled to a decree for the assured sum for the simple reason that the policy of the assured had lapsed. The condition of the policy (Ext. 1) was that the assured shall pay the premium in each year on or before 18th April. It was also the condition in the policy that if premium was not paid on 18th April or thirty days thereafter, the policy shall lapse. In the present case, the second premium was paid on 18th July, 1964 (Ext. B/1), that is, after the grace period. On the basis of Ext. B/1, the case of the Corporation was that the assured did not pay the premium within thirty days of the grace period, that is, on 18th May, 1964, and, as such, the policy of the assured had lapsed. The further case of the defendants was that in view of the fact that the policy which had lapsed was not revived by the assured, the plaintiff was not entitled to the sum assured.
4. On these facts, the trial court decreed the suit.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the court below erred in granting the decree for the assured sum.
6. In this connection, learned counsel for the appellant refers to the deposit memos dated 18th July 1964 (Ext. B/1), dated 6th Aug., 1965 (Ext. B), dated 31st Jan., 1967 (Ext. 3) and dated 8th June, 1967 (Ext. B/2). These memos suggest that the Corporation accepted the premium amount sent by the assured. The Corporation did not issue any official receipt but issued deposit memos certifying that the premium amounts sent by the assured were received in the office of the Corporation. On a perusal of these memos, it is clear that the assured sent the premium amounts in 1964, 1965 and 1967. The premium amount for 1966 was sent in January, 1967 and the premium amount for 1967 was sent in June, 1967.
7. The main case of the defendants was that as the assured did not pay the premium amount in May 1965 within thirty days of the grace period, the policy of the assured had lapsed. If it is so, learned counsel for the appellant contends that unless the policy is revived, the plaintiff is not entitled to the assured sum. In the insurance policy (Ext. 1), there is a condition that the policy can be revived either within six months or within five years from the date of the first unpaid premium. The first upheld (unpaid ?) premium was in 1964 and as such the policy could be revived either within six months or within five years commencing from 18-5-1964. In case, the policy is revived within six months, then no medical certificate is required to be filed in the Corporation. If the policy is revived within five years from the due date of the first unpaid premium, then the assured is required to produce the evidence of his health a
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.