https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794086 Where premium was received before the accident, the insurer assumed risk from the date of receipt under Section 64-VB(2) of the Insurance Act, 1938, and could not avoid liability by relying only on a later policy commencement date. The court drew an adverse inference against the insurer because it did not examine the agent who handled the transaction, despite the agent being the best witness on whether the payment was an advance deposit or premium for the vehicle. The insurer was held liable to satisfy the award, and the challenge to the compensation order failed. en-us Mon, 11 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Jun 2026 07:22:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794086 Where premium was received before the accident, the insurer assumed risk from the date of receipt under Section 64-VB(2) of the Insurance Act, 1938, and could not avoid liability by relying only on a later policy commencement date. The court drew an adverse inference against the insurer because it did not examine the agent who handled the transaction, despite the agent being the best witness on whether the payment was an advance deposit or premium for the vehicle. The insurer was held liable to satisfy the award, and the challenge to the compensation order failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 11 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794086