Back
1931 Supreme(Mad) 80
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Venkatasubba Rao, J.
P. Sankunni Menon
Versus
The Empire of India Life Assurance Co. Ltd. by their Managers, Allum Bharucha and Co.
Decided On : 18.03.1931
The judgment establishes the importance of strict adherence to the terms of an insurance policy, particularly regarding premium payment and the conditions for policy revival and special benefits.
Headnote:
Insurance - Life Insurance Policy - Conditions 3, 5, 6, 7 - The court discussed the provisions of the insurance policy including the grace period for premium payment, revival of lapsed policy, surrender value, and entitlement to a paid-up policy. The court emphasized the strict enforcement of premium payment conditions and the forfeiture of premiums in case of policy lapse.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiff's life insurance policy lapsed due to non-payment of premium. The plaintiff sought a declaration to reinstate the policy, return of premiums, and entitlement to a paid-up policy.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the policy lapsed as per the terms of the insurance contract, and the plaintiff's claims for reinstatement, return of premiums, and a paid-up policy were not valid.
Issues: The main issues were the validity of the policy lapse, entitlement to return of premiums, and eligibility for a paid-up policy.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the strict enforcement of premium payment conditions and the forfeiture of premiums in case of policy lapse. It also highlighted the importance of fulfilling the conditions for revival and entitlement to special benefits such as a paid-up policy.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the plaintiff's action, ruling against the reinstatement of the policy, return of premiums, and entitlement to a paid-up policy.
Venkatasubba Rao, J.
1. By a policy of insurance, dated the 14th of April, 1910, the defendants insured the life of the plaintiff for the sum of Rs. 3,000. The policy was what is generally known as an Endowment Policy. In return for the payment of Rs. 71-13-0 as a premium paid each half year on the 30th of March and the 30th of September for 21 years, the defendants agreed to pay the plaintiffs heirs the sum of Rs. 3,000 if death should take place before the expiration of the period, and the like sum of Rs. 3,000 to the plaintiff himself if he should survive it. The policy was inter alia subject to the following "privileges and conditions":
Condition No. 3.--Thirty days of grace are allowed for payment of yearly and half-yearly premiums, and fifteen days of grace for quarterly and monthly premiums. If payment is not made before expiration of the days of grace, the policy becomes void, and all premiums paid in respect of it will be forfeited. If any Life Assured should die within the days of grace and before the payment of the premium, the policy is valid subject to payment of the premium due.
Condition No. 5.--A policy which has lapsed by non-payment of the premium may be revived within 12 calendar months from the date on which the unpaid premium became due, if the Life Assured is still alive, without evidence of health, on payment of the overdue premium or premiums with interest thereon at the rate of annas eight per cent, per month or part of a month (with a minimum of 4 annas) and fine of Rupee One per month or part thereof, on each Rs. 1,000 Sum Assured, or portion thereof-
Condition No. 6.--After payment of premiums for two years, Policies may be surrendered to the Company for a cash payment (based on the number of annual premiums paid) on application being made while the policy is in force or within 12 months from the date on which the last unpaid premium became due, if the Life Assured is still alive, and on payment of all premiums up to the date of application.
Condition No. 7.--In the case of Whole Life Assurances with a limited number of premiums and of Endowment of Assurances, after premiums for not less than two years have been paid and on application being made while the Policies are in force or within 12 months from the date an which the last unpaid premium became due, if the Life Assured is still alive, and on payment of all premiums up to the receipt of such application and of interest thereon, the Policies will be made paid-up for amounts proportionate to the number of annual premiums paid.
2. The plaintiff paid all the premiums payable up to the 30th of September, 1921, and on that date, under the conditions, the policy had not only acquired a surrender value but the plaintiff had in the alternative become entitled to a fully paid-up policy for a proportion of the original sum assured. The plaintiff made default in payment of the premium due on the 30th of March, 1922, and thereupon the defendants wrote to him stating that the policy had lapsed by non-payment of the premium due on the 30th of March, and that it could not under any circumstances be revived after the expiry of 12 months from that date. They- then drew his attention to the term of the contract bearing on the point and said that it was still open to him to revive the policy by acting in accordance with that term. There was no reply. The Company sent reminders on the 31st of August, 1922, and on the 28th of February, 1923, with no better result. I may also mention that on the 1st of November, 1922, the defendants forwarded to the plaintiff Bonus Certificate for Rs. 75, being the bonus allotted to his policy at the Companys valuation on the 28th February of that year. It will be seen that all the four letters to which I have referred were written before the expiry of 12 months from the date of default in payment of premium. The plaintiff, who till then evinced no interest, wrote on the 25th October, 1924 (about 31 months after default) requesting
