Insurance claim limitation and contractual extinguishment clause upheld; section 28 challenge rejected.

An insurance claim filed more than three years after repudiation was held barred by limitation. The contractual stipulation in clause 6(ii) was also upheld because it did not merely curtail the time for bringing proceedings; it extinguished the right itself if the claim was not pursued within the stipulated period. On that reasoning, the clause was not hit by section 28 of the Contract Act, 1872, and the challenge to its validity failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the insurance claim was barred by limitation and whether clause 6(ii) of the policy was void under section 28 of the Contract Act, 1872.

Analysis: The claim was repudiated in October 1988 and the complaint was filed only in April 1994, so even on the appellant's own case it was beyond three years from repudiation. On the contractual objection, the clause did not merely shorten the time for filing proceedings; it provided for extinction of the right itself if the claim was not pursued within the stipulated period. Such a stipulation falls outside the mischief of section 28 as explained in the earlier authorities relied upon by the Court.

Conclusion: The complaint was barred by limitation and clause 6(ii) was not void under section 28; the appeal failed.

---