1. What is the extent of Insurance Companys liability in a case where it fails to plead limited liability, but places on record the original Insurance policy indicating the limit of its liability. Can the Company be burdened with liability in excess of the limit contained in the policy. In other words should the liability of Company be treated as unlimited merely because it had failed to take the plea of limited liability in its written-statement? This interesting question falls for determination in this appeal.

2. The controversy arises out of a claim petition filed by claimants of one Molvi Abdul Ghani who was killed in a road accident at Pul Doda on Aug.7, 1980. In reply to the claim petition, appellant company did not plead limited liability in its written statement. It, however, placed on record original Insurance Policy which indicated that its liability was limited to to Rs 50,000/-. MACT, Jammu awarded a compensation of Rs 92, OOO/- to the claimants and fastened the entire liability on the company on the ground that it had failed to specifically plead its limited liability The Tribunal ignored the original Insurance Policy from consideration and relying upon a Single Judge judgment of Punjab and Haryana High Court, reported in 1987 ACJ: 203, concluded that companys liability was unlimited. Hence, the appeal on sole ground that Tribunal had erred in excluding the policy from consideration and by disregarding its terms which limited the companys liability to Rs. 50 OOO/-

3 It is a beaten law that a policy of Insurance can cover a greater risk in excess of limits set out in Section 95 (2). It is also settled that in case Insurance Company wants its liability to be held limited it must specifically plead so and substantiate it by proof particularly by bringing the policy on record. If it fails to raise a specific plea in this regard and holds back the policy record, its liability will be regarded unlimited. This position has been consistently affirmed by various High Courts and I feel no necessity of citing decisions in support.

4. Having said so, the difficulty confronts in a case, like the present one, where Insurance Company has not pleaded its limited liability in the written statement, but has placed the original policy on record to show the extent of risk covered. Should Companys liability be treated as unlimited in such a case as held by the Tribunal. In my opinion, the answer is No and this is so for the reasons to be recorded hereinafter.

5. I had the benefit of going through the judgment of Punjab and Haryana High Court (1987 ACJ: 203), relied upon by Tribunal. In this case also, extent of Insurance Company liability was under examination.

6. The Insurer had not raised any plea in this regard, but had placed the policy on record In the facts and circumstance of the case, learned Single Judge held as under:-

"It is pertinent to note that no plea had been raised by the Insurance Company to the effect that its liability was in any manner limited. The plea put forth in written statement being that the offending vehicle was not insured with it. This stands negative by the Insurance Policy, which has been placed on record. Mr. H. Kumar, appearing for Company sought to contend that as the Policy had been placed on record by the Truck-owner, he must be held to be bound by the terms thereof implying that liability of Insurance Company should be taken to be limited to what is stated therein regardness of the fact that no plea had been raised by the Company that its liability was in any manner limited. This is indeed a contention which cant be sustained keeping in view the well Settled position in law new-namely that the liability of the Insurance Company must be held to be unlimited unless a specific plea is taken by the Insurance Company that its liability is limited and there is the policy on record to substantiate it."

7. With great respect, I am unable to subscribe to the view taken which in my opinion, is not correctly base

Click Here to Read the rest of this document