NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Vs. HEMANT KAUSHIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal by the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. has been filed against the award dated 7.9.1994 passed by the Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Beawar (hereinafter referred to as 'The Tribunal'). On 19.8.1992 at 1.30 p.m. in the afternoon one Lavnesh, son of the claimant Hamant Kaushik met with an accident with Truck No. RRN 1101 which was claimed to be insured with the appellant Company. The Tribunal passed an award of Rs. 1,20,000 holding the Insurance Company, the present appellant liable to pay the said amount of compensation in terms of the award. The respondent No. 2 Mr. Kanhaiyalal, the owner of the offended vehicle was also held jointly and severally liable along with the appellant Insurance Company.

(2.) BEING aggrieved with the said award, the Insurance Company has come up in appeal before this Court on the ground that the owner of the offended truck Mr. Kanhaiyalal fraudulently obtained a policy cover note of the Insurance Company for the said truck after accident which actually had occurred on 19.8.1992 near Ajmeri Gate, Beawar at 1.30 p.m. in the afternoon by claiming that the premium of Rs. 1,335 was paid in cash to Mr Akhilesh Jain, the agent of the Insurance Company on 19.8.1992 itself, and, therefore, the Insurance Company should be assumed to have covered the risk of the said vehicle from the mid night of 18.8.1992 and 19.8.1992 and, therefore, the appellant should reimburse the claim.

(3.) THE Tribunal held the Insurance Company liable to pay the amount of compensation relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Ram Dayal and Ors. : [1990]2SCR570 . The said judgment holds that where the renewal of the insurance policy was taken from a particular date i.e. 28.9.1994 which was the date of accident, its effectiveness is from the commencement of the date itself and the word 'date1 was held to commence from 00.00 hours of the previous mid -night. The said case is distinguishable from the facts of the present case because no specific timing of taking insurance which is a subject of contract was mentioned and the matter before the Hon'ble Supreme Court appears to have proceeded on the construction of word 'date' only.