Lack Of Title Documents In Lal Dora Land Does Not Relieve Plaintiff From Proving Continuous Possession To Claim Ownership: Delhi High Court Unauthorized Video Recording Of Court Proceedings Without Prior Permission Amounts To Contempt Of Court: Bombay High Court Finality Of Litigation | State Cannot Re-Litigate Settled Decrees By Alleging Collusion After Affirmation Up To Supreme Court: Allahabad High Court SC/ST Act | Court Cannot Determine Conversion Status To Quash FIR Before Completion Of Investigation: Andhra Pradesh High Court Absence Of Manufacturing Activity And Dilapidated Condition Of Premises Constitute Valid Grounds For Closure: Bombay High Court Non-Disclosure Of Existing Insurance Policies In Proposal Form Entitles Insurer To Repudiate Claim: Calcutta High Court Will Interpretation | Bequest Of "Above Said Property" Includes Entire Estate, Not Just Descriptive Portions Mentioned Therein: Delhi High Court Limitation Act | Court Can Balance Equities By Denying Interest For Delay Period In Land Acquisition Appeals: Gujarat High Court Article 21 Constitution Of India | Personal Liberty Of Detenue Cannot Be Curtailed Without Authority Of Law Post-Acquittal: Jharkhand High Court Order 8 Rule 1A CPC | Trial Court Should Not Reject Documents Merely For Delay If Foundation Is Laid In Pleadings: Andhra Pradesh High Court Order XXII CPC Applies To SCC Suits; Rule 25 Of U.P. Urban Buildings Rules Does Not Govern Substitution Where Act Is Inapplicable: Allahabad High Court Recruitment Authorities Cannot Insist On Impossible Experience Criteria: Karnataka High Court Rules Against Rejection Of Motor Vehicle Inspector Candidates Order 38 Rule 8 CPC | Claim Petition Cannot Be Allowed Ex-Parte Without Adjudication On Merits: Kerala High Court Succession Certificate Under Section 372 Indian Succession Act Cannot Be Granted When Title Is Subject To Intricate Questions Of Fact And Law: Madras High Court SARFAESI Act | District Magistrate Cannot Adjudicate Disputes Between Borrower And Secured Creditor While Assisting Possession: Madhya Pradesh High Court Termination Based On Caste Status Without Cancellation Of Original Certificate Is Legally Unsustainable: Orissa High Court Section 13 Punjab Village Common Lands Act | Civil Court Jurisdiction Not Ousted In Private Injunction Suits Where Title Against Panchayat Is Not Sought: High Court Rights Of Persons With Disabilities Act  | Equal Opportunity Policy Of Employer Is Mandatory; Routine Transfer Policy Must Yield To Special Provisions For Caregivers: Rajasthan High Court Compensation Must Be Just, Not A Pittance: Punjab & Haryana High Court Enhances Award In Motor Accident Claim Registration Act | Sub-Registrar Has No Power To Adjudicate Title Or Refuse Registration Based On Unauthorized Layouts: Telangana High Court Section 50 NDPS Act | Failure To Individually Communicate Right To Be Searched Before Gazetted Officer Or Magistrate Vitiates Conviction: Telangana High Court

Insurance Law | Acceptance of Premium and Issuance of Receipt Signify Commencement of Insurance Coverage: Supreme Court Holds in LIC Dispute

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court has reinstated the orders of the District Forum and State Commission that were in favor of Mrs. Bhumikaben N. Modi & Ors., in their insurance claim dispute with Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC). Justices A.S. Bopanna and C.T. Ravikumar overturned the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission’s (NCDRC) decision that had dismissed the appellants’ claims following the policyholder’s death.

The core legal issue addressed by the Supreme Court centered on whether the acceptance of a first premium by LIC, followed by the issuance of a policy receipt, established a binding insurance contract prior to the policyholder’s untimely death.

The dispute originated when Mr. Narender Kumar Kantilal Modi, the deceased, submitted his life insurance proposal and premium shortly before dying from an accidental electric shock. Although LIC issued an Acceptance-cum-First Premium Receipt, it later contested the policy’s validity, arguing that the formal acceptance of the proposal had not occurred before Mr. Modi’s death.

The Supreme Court scrutinized the sequence of events and documentary proofs, affirming that the initial forums had rightly determined the existence of a binding contract from the actions of LIC, which included the acknowledgment of premium payment and policy effectuation before Mr. Modi’s demise. The apex court criticized the NCDRC’s contrary decision, underscoring that LIC’s subsequent attempt to block the policy post-death was irrelevant to the contract’s validity.

Justice Ravikumar emphasized, “The issuance of a receipt and acceptance of the premium unequivocally placed the insurer on risk from that date, thereby binding them to the contract terms regardless of subsequent internal actions.”

Decision: By setting aside the NCDRC’s order, the Supreme Court directed LIC to adhere to the original favorable orders and settle the claims according to the policy terms within two months.

Date of Decision: May 8, 2024.

Mrs. Bhumikaben N. Modi & Ors. Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India,

Latest Legal News