The non-forfeiture period of 6 months in a life insurance policy should be reckoned from and including the due date, and a calendar month is reckoned according to the British Calendar.

Mr. Justice P.K. Shamsuddin, President—This complaint is filed seeking a direction to the Opposite Parties to pay an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from 28.8.90.

2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are as follows:—

3. The husband of the complainant Dr. Rajendran insured his life with the 1st Opposite Party for Rs. 2 lakhs on 28th August 1986. As per the terms and conditions of the policy, premium amount of Rs. 3,777.50 had to be paid quarterly and if the premium amount was not paid on the due date, interest on the premium amount also had to be paid from its due date till its payment. The complainant alleged that he paid premium due upto 28.2.1990 with interest on it. The next premium was due to be paid on 28.5.90. While so Dr. Rajendran died on 28.8.1990 at S.S.N.M. Hospital at Varkala. So on the date of his death one premium on his Life Insurance Policy was due and the due date for payment of the said unpaid premium was on 28.5.90. The complainant contended that according to the terms and conditions if after atleast three full years premium is paid in respect of the policy, any subsequent premium be not duly paid in the event of death of the life assured within 6 months from the due date of the first unpaid premium the policy will be paid as if the policy had remained in full force after deduction of (a) the premium of premia unpaid with interest thereon to the date of death on the same terms as for revival of the policy during such period and, (b) the unpaid premium falling before the next anniversary of the policy. The complainant alleged that she is the nominee of her husband under the policy and as per the law of insurance and as per the terms under which the policy was insured the complainant was entitled to get the full amount assured on the life of the deceased. Though complainant approached the Opposite Parties they did not pay full amount and intimated that they would pay only Rs. 49,000/- which is only the paid up value under the above policy. It is in these circumstances the complaint was filed claiming Rs. 2,00,000/- together with interest at the rate of 18%.

4. The Opposite Party filed version contending that the premium paid on 3.5.90 was towards premium due on 28.11.1989. The premium was not paid and it was in a lapsed condition from 28.2.1990. The policy was in force only for 31/2 years and therefore the nonforfeiture period of six months applicable expired on the midnight of 27.8.1990. The life assured died after the expiry of the said period on the next day and therefore the claim was admitted for paid up value only. It is therefore contended that the complaint is without any merits.

5. It is admitted at the time of argument by Learned Counsel for the complainant that payment on 3.5.1990 was towards the premium due on 28.11.1989. The next premium was due on 28.2.90. The question to be considered is how the period of 6 months has to be reckoned to determine the question whether the complainant is entitled to relief claimed by the complainant.

6. Learned Counsel for the Opposite Party submitted the first unpaid premium fell due on 28.2.1990 and the 6 months period from that date expired on the midnight of 27.8.1990 and since the death occurred on 28.8.1990 the complainant is not entitled to the benefit of the claim.

7. Learned Counsel for the Opposite Party invited attention to manual for policies of Survey Department. Chapter 2 Clause 3 relates to extension of the Claims Concession. The principle to reckon the days of grace has been mentioned in Clause 3 which reads as follows:—

“The non-forfeiture period of 6 months under Claims Concession Clause should be reckoned from and including the due date. If premium e.g., if the due date of the 1st unpaid premium is 10th April, the non-forfeiture period would expire at the midnight of 9th October, even if that day happens to be a public holiday.”

8. Learned Counsel for Opposite Parties also invited our attention to Section 3(35)