LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION Vs. NARMADA AGARWALLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE aforementioned two Letters Patent Appeals arise out of common judgment passed by a learned Single Judge in First Appeal Nos. 1 and 2 of 1986 confirming the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge, Karanjia, in Money Suit Nos. 9 and 10 of 1983. Therefore, this judgment is passed which shall govern both the above appeals.

(2.) UNDISPUTED facts leading to these appeals lie in a narrow compass:

(3.) INSURANCE is a contract upon speculation, the legal concept of which is a contingent contract. The special facts upon which the contingent chance is to be computed lie most commonly in the knowledge of the assured only; the underwriter trusts on his representation and proceeds upon confidence that he does not keep back any circumstance in his knowledge to mislead the underwriter into a belief that the circumstance does not exist. To keep back such circumstance is fraud, and therefore, the policy is void. Chity on contract states: