TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 1467
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o the Award dated 26/02/2022 passed by the Fourth Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gwalior in Claim Case No.500108/2015, whereby the Claims Tribunal awarded compensation in favour of the claimants by imposing liability upon the Insurance Company. 2. The date of accident and negligence are not in dispute. However, the findings recorded by the Claims Tribunal in this regard are not under challenge. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company submitted that the impugned award passed by the Claims Tribunal is erroneous and contrary to the facts, evidence and material available on record. It is submitted that the Claims Tribunal failed to properly appreciate the evidence of Anand Shrivastava (DW-2), which clearly estab....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d 16/04/2015 mentioned in the policy related to the advance deposit of Rajaram Sahu and not to the premium deposited by the insured. Therefore, according to the appellant, the Claims Tribunal erred in fastening liability upon the Insurance Company. It is further submitted that insurance is contractual in nature between the insurer and the insured. Since, as per Ex.D/2, the policy commenced from 21/04/2015 and the accident occurred on 19/04/2015, the offending vehicle was not insured on the date of accident and, therefore, the appellant/Insurance Company cannot be held liable to pay compensation. . Reliance has been placed upon the judgments in Deokar Exports PVt. Ltd Vs New India Assurance Company Ltd, 2009 ACJ 133, Oriental Insurance Compa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he insurance policy (Ex.D/2), the offending vehicle was insured for the period from 21/04/2015 to 20/04/2016 from midnight. The policy was issued on 20/04/2015. Thus, technically, the insurance policy was not in existence on the date of accident, i.e., 19/04/2015. 7. The contention of learned counsel for the appellant is that the premium amount was paid to agent Rajaram Sahu on 20/04/2015 and, therefore, the policy was issued on the same date with effect from 21/04/2015. However, the Insurance Company failed to examine Rajaram Sahu, who was the best witness to establish that the premium amount was received on 20/04/2015 and not on 16/04/2015. In absence of such material evidence, the Insurance Company failed to prove its contention regar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stal money order or cheque sent by post, the risk may be assumed on the date on which the money order is booked or the cheque is posted, as the case may be." 11. The judgments relied upon by the appellant are distinguishable on facts, as in those cases the date of receipt of premium was not in dispute. Therefore, the said judgments do not render any assistance to the appellant. 12. In Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Sheela Bai and others, 2007 ACJ 798 a Coordinate Bench of this Court held that where the premium amount had been received prior to issuance of the policy, the Insurance Company would be liable to pay compensation in view of Section 64-VB(2) of the Insurance Act, 1938. 13. In the case of National Insurance Company Lt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... section 146 of the MV Act, section 64-VB, though the section is couched in a negative manner, would not and could not be understood to give the liberty to the insurer to postpone the date of assumption of risk by virtue of statutory operation of the provision under section 64-VB even after receiving the premium in cash or when it is guaranteed or deposited. In short, in such circumstances, an insurer of a motor vehicle involved in an accident during the currency of its policy of insurance, cannot decline to assume the risk arising out of that accident merely because going by the policy document its coverage commenced not from the date of receipt of premium. On the other hand, the insurer is bound to assume the risk from the date and time o....