Eyewitness Consistency is Key in Upholding Murder Convictions," Rules Rajasthan High Court State Cannot Take the Defence of Adverse Possession Against an Individual, Rules MP High Court in Land Encroachment Case Ignoring Crucial Evidence is an Illegal Approach: P&H High Court in Remanding Ancestral Property Dispute for Fresh Appraisal A Litigant Should Not Suffer for the Mistakes of Their Advocate: Madras High Court Overturns Rejection of Plaint in Specific Performance Suit 20% Interim Compensation is Not Optional in Cheque Bounce Appeals, Rules Punjab & Haryana High Court Presumption of Innocence Fortified by Acquittal: Rajasthan High Court Upholds Verdict in Accident Case Absence of Fitness Certificate Invalidates Insurance Claim, Rules MP High Court: Statutory Requirement Can't Be Ignored Punjab & Haryana High Court Affirms Protection for Live-In Couple Amidst Pending Divorce Proceedings Reassessment Must Be Based on New Tangible Material: Delhi High Court Quashes IT Proceedings Against Samsung India Kerala High Court Denies Bail to Police Officer Accused of Raping 14-Year-Old: 'Grave Offences Demand Strict Standards' Repeated Writ Petitions Unacceptable: Calcutta High Court Dismisses Land Acquisition Challenge Delhi High Court Upholds Validity of Reassessment Notices Issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officers in Light of Faceless Assessment Scheme Adverse Possession Claims Fail Without Proof of Hostile Possession: Madras High Court Temple's Ancient Land Rights Upheld: Kerala High Court Rejects Adverse Possession Claims Expulsion Must Be Exercised in Good Faith — Calcutta High Court Orders Fresh Adjudication in Partnership Dispute Instigation Requires Reasonable Certainty to Incite the Consequence: Delhi High Court in Suicide Case

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,

Similar News