Limitation For Executing Partition Decree Not Suspended Till Engrossment; Right To Seek Engrossment Subsists During 12-Year Execution Period: Allahabad HC Unilateral Revocation Of Registered Gift Deed Through Sub-Registrar Is Void, Donor Must Approach Civil Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mediation Cannot Be Forced Upon Unwilling Party In Civil Suits; Consent Of Both Sides Essential: Bombay High Court Unmarried Daughter Not Entitled To Freedom Fighter Pension If Gainfully Employed At Time Of Father's Death: Calcutta High Court Section 125 CrPC | Maintenance Cannot Be Denied For Lack Of Formal Divorce From First Marriage: Delhi High Court ONGC Cannot Demand Security From Award Holder After Giving ‘No Objection’ To Withdrawal Of Deposited Amount: Andhra Pradesh High Court Sedative Drugs Like Tramadol Impact Mental Fitness Of Declarant; Bombay High Court Acquits Man Relying On Doubtful Dying Declarations Postal Tracking Report Showing 'Refusal' Not Conclusive Proof Of Service If Denied On Oath: Delhi High Court Encroachments Near Military Installations Pose National Security Threat; Remove Illegal Constructions Within Three Months: Rajasthan High Court Punjab & Haryana High Court Directs State To Decide On Legality Of Charging Fees For Downloading FIRs From 'SAANJH' Portal Wife’s Educational Qualifications No Bar To Seeking Maintenance If Actual Employment Is Not Proven: Orissa High Court Mere Telephonic Contact Without Substance Of Conversation Cannot Establish Criminal Conspiracy: Madhya Pradesh High Court Serious Allegations Like HIV/AIDS Imputations Require Corroboration, Cannot Rest Solely On Unsubstantiated Testimony: Karnataka High Court Family Court Cannot Refuse Mutual Consent Divorce Merely Because Parties Are Living Separately 'Without Valid Reason': Kerala High Court Collective Attempts By Advocates To Overbear Presiding Officer Not Protected Professional Conduct: Madras High Court Dismisses Quash Petitions No Legal Evidence Required To Forward A Person To Trial? Rajasthan HC Slams Police For Implicating Accused In NDPS Case Solely On Co-Accused's Statement Accused Must Be Physically Present In Court To Furnish Bonds Under Section 91 BNSS: Punjab & Haryana 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