Back
2008 Supreme(P&H) 842
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Ajay K.Mittal, J.
New India Assurance Company Limited
Versus
Krishna Devi
First Appeal Order No. 1351 of 1991,
Decided On : APRIL 7, 2008
The effectiveness of an insurance policy is determined by the time and date specified in the policy, as established by legal precedents.
Headnote:
Insurance Policy - Motor Accident Claims - General Clauses Act - National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sobina Iakai, 2007 ACJ 2043 (SC); New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Ram Dayal, 1990 ACJ 545 (SC); National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Jikubhai Nathuji Dabhi, 1997 ACJ 351 (SC); Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sunita Rathi, 1998 ACJ 121 (SC); New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Bhagwati Devi, 1999 ACJ 534 (SC); J. Kalaivani v. K. Sivashankar, 2002 ACJ 613 (SC) - The judgment discusses the effectiveness of the insurance policy in relation to the time and date specifically incorporated in the policy and not from an earlier point of time. It emphasizes that the insurance policy would start from the time and date indicated in the policy, and not from an earlier point of time. The court relied on various precedents to establish the legal principle that the effectiveness of the insurance policy is determined by the time and date specified in the policy.
Fact of the Case:
Three separate claim petitions were filed in respect of the same accident, seeking compensation for the death of two individuals and injuries to another. The insurance company contested the claim petitions on the grounds that the truck involved was not insured with them at the time of the accident.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the insurance policy for the offending truck was taken after the accident had occurred, based on the evidence and the time of the accident and the policy purchase. The court relied on legal precedents to establish the effectiveness of the insurance policy based on the time and date specified in the policy.
Issues: The main issue was whether the insurance policy for the offending truck was in existence at the time of the accident.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on legal precedents to establish that the effectiveness of the insurance policy is determined by the time and date specified in the policy, and not from an earlier point of time.
Final Decision: The appeals were allowed, setting aside the liability of the appellant insurance company to pay the compensation. The appellant was entitled to recover any compensation already paid from the owner and the driver of the offending truck.
Ajay Kumar Mittal, J.
1. This order will dispose of three appeals, F.A.O. Nos. 1351, 1352 and 1353 of 1991, filed by appellant insurance company. These appeals have arisen out of a single award dated 8.6.1991, passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sonepat, rendered in three different claim petitions in respect of the same accident.
2. The claimants filed three separate claim petitions wherein different amounts of compensation were sought. Petitions were filed on the strength of the averments that on 29.4.1987 at 3.15 p.m. three persons, namely, Bhim Singh, Raj Singh and Bajinder Singh were standing on the kacha portion of the approach road leading to village Harsana Kalan from Sonepat-Rohtak Road. Raj Singh and Bajinder Singh were having their respective bicycles. Meanwhile, a truck bearing registration No. HRS 264, owned by Krishan Lal and driven by Karambir alias Dharambir came from the side of Harsana Kalan and struck against the said three persons. The truck dragged the trio along with the cycles up to some distance. Raj Singh and Bhim Singh died at the spot whereas Bajinder Singh received injuries. This is why, three petitions came to be filed, two by the dependants of the two deceased and the third by the injured himself. It was further pleaded that accident was witnessed by Ishwar Singh, Randhir Singh and Partap Singh, residents of village Harsana Kalan who at that time had been coming on their tractor from Sonepat side.
3. F.A.O. No. 1351 of 1991 has arisen out of claim petition filed by Krishna Devi and others in respect of the death of Bhim Singh whereas F.A.O. No. 1352 of 1991 has arisen out of claim petition filed by Meshi and others in respect of the death of Raj Singh. The third appeal, F.A.O. No. 1353 of 1991, has been preferred by the insurance company in respect of the award passed in the claim petition filed by Bajinder Singh injured.
4. The claim petitions were contested by the owner of the offending truck and by the appellant insurance company only. The owner of the truck, i.e., respondent No. 7 herein, while denying the allegations made in the claim petition pleaded that the truck in question was not involved in any accident nor was it being driven rashly and negligently by its driver. The appellant insurance company, however, took a specific stand in the written statement filed to the claim petitions that the truck in question was not insured with it at the time of the accident and as such there was no privity of contract between the appellant insurance company and the owner of the truck. It was further specifically pleaded that policy of the truck was purchased at 5.30 p.m. on 29.4.1987 whereas the accident in question had already taken place at 3.15 p.m. during the same day.
5. Since these are the appeals at the instance of the insurance company and the only controversy involved therein is, whether the policy of insurance of the offending truck was purchased after the accident in question, it is not necessary to go into the questions, as to what was the income of the deceased; to what extent was the dependency of the claimants on the deceased or what loss had been caused to the injured due to sufferance of the injuries in the accident. Suffice it to notice, the claimants in the case of each of the two deceased, were awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 96,000 and the injured was awarded a sum of Rs. 18,000 as compensation for the injuries suffered, vide award dated 8.6.1991.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their assistance.
7. The bone of contention between the parties in this appeal as noticed above is, whether no insurance policy in respect of the offending truck was in existence at the time of the accident in question. The onus to prove this question was on the appellant insurance company.
8. The Tribunal on the basis of the evidence on record concluded that the accident in this case had taken place at 3.15 p.m. on 29.4.1987 wh
