Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Rajan Roy, Brij Raj Singh, JJ.
Rachana Soni – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard.
2. The claim of petitioner under the Mukhyamantri Kishan Evam Sarvhit Beema Yojna has been declined by the District Level Committee on the ground of delay. As per the Committee the claim should have been raised within a period of one month from the date of death which could be further extended for another one month, meaning thereby, within a maximum period of two months, instead the claim was raised on 16.11.2018 though the death took place on 14.05.2018, thus, it was raised beyond the aforesaid period of two months.
3. However, learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon a judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court rendered on 11.03.2022 in SLP (C) No. 3978 of 2022 (The Oriental Insurance company Limited vs. Sanjesh & Anr.) to contend that such a condition in the scheme is hit by Section 28 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 as has been held by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the said case. The said judgement has been rendered in respect of the same scheme albeit involving another Insurance Company i.e. The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, as, it is the law of land, therefore, in view of this judgment, the decision of the District Level Committee cannot be sustained.
Conditions restricting the timeframe for filing claims under an insurance scheme are void as per Section 28 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872.
Point of Law - Since it cannot be disputed that the claimant is entitled to the insured amount, Court decline to offer any interference under Article 226 of the Constitution on a technical ground.
The court affirmed that an insurance company cannot contest a claim based on the insured's status after significant delay and emphasized the need for timely processing of claims.
Insurance policy clauses limiting claim submission to fixed periods (e.g., 90 days max) that extinguish insured's rights are void under Section 28(b) of Indian Contract Act, 1872.
Point of Law : Plea of limitation taken up in the present case on the strength of clause 20 of the agreement read with Article 44 of the Schedule appended to the Limitation Act, would not defeat the ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
