L I C OF INDIA Vs. ANURADHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted in SLP (C) No. 9334 of 2000.

(2.) A common question of law centering around Sections 107 and 108 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 arises for decision in these two appeals.

(3.) In Civil Appeal No. 2655 of 1999, Sham Prakash Sharma, the late husband of Mrs. Anuradha, the respondent, had taken a life insurance policy from the appellant-Life Insurance Corporation of India (hereinafter, the LIC or Corporation, for short). The policy commenced with effect from 8-2-1986. The premium was payable every six months. For two years, the premium was paid. On 17-7-1988 Sham Prakash Sharma was at Bombay wherefrom he just disappeared, never to be traced out thereafter. The respondent, Anuradha, lodged a first information report with the police. On 11th July, 1988, the LIC had sent a communication addressed to Sham Prakash Sharma and delivered at his residence informing that the insurance policy had lapsed for non-payment of premium. On 29-6-1996, the respondent approached the LIC for release of benefits under the policy proceedings on an assumption that Sham Prakash was dead as having not been heard of for a period of more than seven years. The LIC turned down the claim of the respondent relying on Rule 14 of the Insurance Manual which reads as under :