KRISHNA LAL SADHU Vs. MTPROMILA BALA DASI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case the main contention that has been urged on behalf of the two defendants who are appellants before us is that the money payable under a policy of insurance, being policy No. 4667, issued by the Hindusthan Co operative Insurance Society Limited, did form part of the assets of the estate of one Behary Lal Sircar deceased and that his widow Pramila Bala Dassi had no rights therein. In order to understand the precise significance of this contention it is necessary to set out the facts giving rise to the litigation out of which the present appeal has arisen. It appears that one Behari Lal Sircar insured his life on 29 March 1910 for a sum of Rs. 500. The material words of the policy, with which we are concerned are as follows: The Society hereby guarantees to insure that if the insured pays to the society at their office in Calcutta on the 5 day of March 1910 each succeeding year up to and including the year of his death the sum of Rs. 21 and 11 annas only or in lieu of any such annual premium the full number of instalments thereof as may be agreed upon (of which agreement the receipt granted by the Society shall be full and sufficient evidence) then upon proof to the satisfaction of the office committee of the Society of the death of the insured and the title to the policy, the Society will pay to Srimati Pramila Bala Dassi, wife of the insured (hereinafter called the nominee) at the head office of the Society, in Calcutta or at the permanent residence of the nominee whichever may be preferred the sum, of Rs. 500 only together with such additional sum or sums by way of profits as, according to the Society's regulations may accrue and become payable in respect of the policy, after deducting therefrom : (1) the balance of the premium, if any, payable in respect of the year of the insured's death; and (2) also other sum or sums, if any due from him to the Society.

(2.) The assured paid all the premiums due on the policy till his death which took place some time in 1324 B.S. He died leaving him surviving the plaintiff, Pramila Bala Dassi, his widow, and three sons. The sons were his heirs under the Hindu law. On the death of the assured the plaintiff claimed the amount of the said policy and it appears that the Insurance Society were about to make payment to the plaintiff. Defendants 1 and 2 who had obtained a decree against the sons of the deceased and defendant 3 who had also obtained another decree against them attached the amount payable under the policy in execution of their two decrees. The plaintiff thereupon preferred a claim under the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code, but her claim was disallowed and the money due under the policy was rateably distributed among the three execution creditors Thereafter the present suit was brought by the plaintiff for declaration of her title to the amount payable under the said policy and for recovery of the money from the creditors.

(3.) In the Court of first instance the plaintiff's suit was contested only on behalf of defendants 1 and 2 and it was held that the money due under the policy became the property of the plaintiff on the death of the deceased and did not form part of the assets of the estate left by him. The decree of the first Court ran as follows: Plaintiff to get a decree for the sum of Rs. 173-0-9 with proportionate costs for plaint and pleader's fees, whole cost of the suit necessitated by the contest from defend ants 1 and 2; and Rs. 326-15-3 with proportionate costs for the plaint and pleader's fee from defendant 3.