https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275589 Section 44(2) of the Insurance Act, as modified by notification, was construed to allow a deceased insurance agent to nominate, in writing, any person to receive renewal commission after death. The proviso was held to do more than authorise collection on behalf of the estate: it displaced the heirs' statutory entitlement where a valid nomination existed and had not been revoked. The distinction from nomination under Section 39 was treated as material because the proviso operated on a statutory right created for the heirs and could redirect payment to the nominee as the intended recipient. Accordingly, the nominee was entitled to receive the renewal commission in her own right. en-us Thu, 04 Sep 1975 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Oct 2018 12:17:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275589 Section 44(2) of the Insurance Act, as modified by notification, was construed to allow a deceased insurance agent to nominate, in writing, any person to receive renewal commission after death. The proviso was held to do more than authorise collection on behalf of the estate: it displaced the heirs' statutory entitlement where a valid nomination existed and had not been revoked. The distinction from nomination under Section 39 was treated as material because the proviso operated on a statutory right created for the heirs and could redirect payment to the nominee as the intended recipient. Accordingly, the nominee was entitled to receive the renewal commission in her own right. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 04 Sep 1975 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275589