Judgments related to Commencement of Policy and Breach of Policy under MV Act

 

Judgments related to Commencement of Policy and Breach of Policy under MV Act

 

 

1 Policy – commencement of premium accepted on 3.5.97 but

cover note specified the effective date of commencement as 5.5.97, as 3.5.97 was holiday IC contended that at the date of accident i.e. 4.5.97, there was not effective policy in existence whether IC is liable. Held ; yes contract of insurance comes

in to effect from the date of acceptance of premium more

particularly when IC had received the premium prior to the date of accident

2011 ACJ 1728 (BOM), 2022 ACJ 536 (Kar), 2022

ACJ 567 (Mad)

2 Accident occurred on 20.5.85 at 7.45 pm IP valid from 20.5.85 to 19.5.86 IP does not speak about the time of commencement of policy when policy is silent about the time of its commencement, starting time has to be taken as from the midnight of 20.5.85 and its ends at 2400 hrs on 19.5.86 IC held liable

2011 ACJ 2394 (DEL)

3 An insurance policy, in law, could be issued from a future date. A policy, however, which is issued from a future date must be with the consent of the holder of the policy. The insurance company cannot issue a policy unilaterally from a future date without the consent of the holder of a policy –

2009 (13) SCC370 –Blabir Kaur v/s N.I.A.Com

4 U/s 147 (1) Insurance Act u/s 64VB IC tried to avoid its liability on the ground that police has not come into existence as verification of vehicle was not done whether sustainable Held ; No. once premium is paid, IC cannot avoid its liability

2012 ACJ 1322

4 A Payment of premium was made on 13.4.2004 – IC issued

policy on 14.4.2004, 00.00 hrs. Accident occurred on 13.4.2004 at 1.30 pm. Whether IC can avoid its liability? Held ; No.

2019 ACJ 1162

5 Commencement of policy starts when? It starts when entire amount of premium is paid/made and it does not make any difference when policy is made effective.

2013 ACJ 2493 (Mad)O.I. Com. v/s Venkataraman, dated 18.07.2012.

6 Section 64 VB – commencement of policy – whether IC

can defer assumption of risk to a later point of time other than from the date and time of receipt of the premium? Held ; No.

Insurance Policy (IP) under the MV Act stands on different footing than the other IP

2014 ACJ 2847 (Chh) – SC judgments followed. 2022 ACJ 96 (Mad)

7 One of the grounds which is available to the Insurance Company for denying its statutory liability is that the policy is void having been obtained by reason of non – disclosure of a material fact or by a representation of fact which was false in some

material particular once a valid contract is entered into, only because of a mistake, the name of original owner not been mentioned in the certificates of registration, it cannot be said that the contract itself is void unless it was shown that in obtaining the said contract, a fraud has been practiced no particulars of fraud pleaded IC held liable

2009 (1) SCC 58.

8 Private vehicle breach of policy in FIR it is stated that vehicle was hired IC disputed its liability relying on the word ‘hired’ in FIR eye witnesses deposed that vehicle was ‘borrowed’ from the friend and denied that it was ‘hired’ whether IC is liable. Held ; yes as IC has neither confronted the witnesses with the statement made by them in FIR nor examined the IO or RTO officer

2011 ACJ 1482 (SIK)

9 Liability of IC in tariff, under 'Limits of Liability' it is mentioned 'As required by Law' and not 'Act Policy' – words explained. In such situation, IC is liable to pay awarded by the Tribunal. 2012

AAC 3136.

10 Farmer's Package Policy Tractor trolley purpose – use of guideline for assessment of liability of IC.

2014 ACJ 1691 (Mad), 2015 ACJ 2624 (All), 2014

ACJ 1254 (SC) – Fahim Ahmad v/s UII Com.

11 Contention that accident occurred on 27.11.1992 at 12.30 pm and policy was obtained at 3.30 pm on the same day without disclosing fact accident and, therefore, IC is not liable. Whether

sustainable? Held ; No.

Since IC failed to prove that policy came into existence w.e.f. 27.11.1992 at 3.30 pm. 2015 ACJ 1347 (Jhr).

12– Owner of the offending vehicle did not file written statement neither adduced any evidence that before the date of accident, premium was paid by him and IC issued Cover note on the basis. IC also disputed that said cover note was forged – Under these

circumstances, IC held not liable to pay compensation. 2015 ACJ 1824 (Bom)

13 Premium received on 30.10.2000 – covernote issued on

31.10.2000 at 4.40 pm – accident occurred on 31.10.2000 at 10.30 am – whether IC is liable? Held ;Yes. As per Section 64VB

of the Insurance Act and Section 147 of the MV Act policy commences from the date of receipt of payment i.e. 30.10.2000 and, therefore, IC is liable. 2018 ACJ 2764 (MP)

14 Commencement of policy IC issued policy mentioned

time and date as 1957 hrs and 23.05.2012 accident occurred on 0230 hrs on 23.05.2012 contention that payment of premium was made on 22.05.2012 at 2005 hrs whether the IC is liable? Held

No.

Policy commences from the date and time mentioned in the

policy and not from the date and time mentioned in the policy 2022 ACJ 2174 (Mad).

15 IC issued IP for a period between 03.10.2007 to 02.09.2007 accident occurred on 22.08.2008 IC contended that inadvertently wrong dated are mentioned in the IP and the actual date of IP is

10.03.2007 to 09.03.2008 whether sustainable Held ; No.      2022 ACJ 2225(Gau)