High CourtDivision BenchAppeals dismissed

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. v. RAM DAYAL AND ORS.

Case / Petition Number:Civil Appeal Nos. 1188-89 of 1987
Neutral Citation:1990 SCR 570

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court
Hon'ble Judges
  • Ranganath Misra
  • K. Ramaswamy
Judgment Date
1990-04-20
Court Decision / Holding
The appeals fail and are dismissed. There would, however, be no order for costs.
Final Disposition
Appeals dismissed

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

Respondents

  • Ram Dayal
  • Anr.

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • K.K. Jain
  • • Pramod Dayal

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Meera Chhabra
  • • Ms. Pani Chhabra

Case Synopsis & Summary

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Ram Dayal and Ors. concerns whether an insurance policy taken after a motor vehicle accident can be invoked to meet an award of compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal had held the insurer not liable, on the ground that the policy was issued post‑accident. On appeal, the Punjab and Haryana High Court held that a policy obtained on the date of the accident became operative from the start of that date (i.e., from midnight), and since the accident occurred on the same day as the policy, the insurer was liable to meet the award. The Supreme Court dismissed the insurer’s appeals, agreeing with the High Court’s reasoning and holding that when a policy is taken on a particular date its effectiveness is from the commencement of that date. The Court cited Madras High Court Division Benches and a Punjab & Haryana High Court decision that a policy taken during any part of the day becomes operative from the beginning of that day, and also referenced Allahabad High Court authority (Jaddoo Singh v. Smt. Malti Devi) in support. The ratio underscores that cover is available if the policy is in force on the day of the accident, rejecting the insurer’s attempt to limit liability by post‑accident renewal. It also invokes Stroud’s principles on dates to justify treating the date as the day’s start for policy effectiveness.

Provisions of Law Cited

Motor Vehicles Act, 1939

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Date means day (as per Stroud's Judicial Dictionary)
  • A judicial act will be referred to the first moment of the day on which it is done (Re F. & B. Warren)
  • A policy taken on a date is effective from the commencement of that date

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The insurer contended that the policy was taken after the accident, hence there was no liability to meet the award; the Tribunal accepted this stance and the High Court upheld it on the basis that the policy was not in force at the time of the accident.

Contentions of Respondents

The policy taken on the date of the accident was argued to be operative from the commencement of that date (midnight), so the insurer remains liable to meet the owner's liability under the award.

Cited Precedents (3)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Jaddoo Singh & Anr v. Smt. Malti Devi & Anr.AIR 1983 All. 87PositiveSupreme Court approved this Madras High Court decision supporting the view that a policy taken on the date of accident becomes operative from the start of that day.
In re. F.B. Warren[1938] Ch. 725Mentioned OnlyCited as authority; discussed the principle that a judicial act is referred to the first moment of the day on which it is done.
Re F & B Warren[1938] Ch. 725Mentioned OnlySame case as above; cited in a variant form to emphasize the same principle.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. v. RAM DAYAL AND ORS. and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. A _v._ RAM DAYAL AND ORS. APRIL 20, 1990 B [RANGANATH MISRA AND K. RAMASWAMY, JJ.] _Motor Vehicles Act,_ _1939:_ _Insurance Policy--When becomes_ _effective._ In a claim for compensation, the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal held that the insurer was not liable to meet the award of compensation ##### C against the owner of the vehicle, as the policy had been taken after the ---1- · accident. On appeal, the High Court held that the insurance policy obtained on the date of accident became operative from the commencement of the date of insurance, i.e. from the previous mid-night, and since the accident took place on the date of the policy, the insurer -~ D became liable. Dismissing the appeals by the insurer, this Court. HELD: When a policy is taken on a particiuar date, its effectiveness is from the commencement of the date. E ##### In the instant case, the insurance was taken from 28th September, -A 1984, which is the date of the accident. The High Court was, therefore, right in holding that the insurer wa .. liable in terms of the Act to meet the liability of the owner under the award. [571F-G] p _Jaddoo Singh_ _&_ _Anr._ v. _Smt. Ma/ti Devi_ _&_ _Anr.,_ AIR 1983 All. ##### 8 7, approved. --I G H _In re._ _F.B. Warren,_ [1938] Ch. 725, referred to. _Stroud's Judicial Dictionary._ referred to. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 1188-89 of 1987. From the Judgment and Order dated 21. 11.1986 of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in First Appeal Order Nos. 620 & 619 of 1986. 570 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE _v._ RAM DAYAL [MISRA, J.] 571 K.K. Jain and Pramod Dayal for the Appellant. Meera Chhabra and Ms. Pani Chhabra for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by **RANGANATH** **MISRA,** **J.** These are appeals by special leave challenging the reversing common decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court holding the insurer liable for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act of 1939. A B The insurer repudiated its liability by maintaining that the policy had been taken aner the accident and, therefore, it had no liability to C meet the award of compensation against the owner. The Tribunal accepted this stand and rejected the claim against the insurer. In appeal, the High Court took the view relying upon certain decisions that the insurance policy obtained on the date of the accident became operative from the commencement of the date of insurance-Le. from the previous mid-night and since the accident took place on the date of D the policy the insurer became liable. >--- Apart from the judgment under appeal, we find that this view is supported by two judgments of the Madras High Court and an earlier decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court. Two Division Benches of the Madras High Court have taken the view after discussing the E law at length that the policy taken during any part of the day becomes operative from the commencement of that day. Besides these judgments a Division Bench decision of the Allahabad High Court in _Jaddoo Singh_ _&_ _Anr._ v. _Smt. Malti Devi_ _&_ _Anr.,_ AIR 1983 All. 87 supports this view on principle. There is evidence in this case that the vehicle was insured earlier upto 31.8.1984 and the same was available to be renewed but instead **of** **obtaining renewal, a fresh insurance was taken from 28th** **of** September, 1984, which is the date of the accident. We are inclined to agree with the view indicated in these decisions that when a policy is taken on a particular date its effectiveness is from the commencement of the date and, therefore, the High Court, in our opinion, was right in holding that the insurer was liable in terms of the Act to meet the liab1Jity of the ow:ier under the award. F G As pointed out in _Stroud's judicial Dictionary_ 'Date' means day, so that where a cover not providing for temporary insurance of a motor H ## .. 572 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1990] 2 S.C.R. # . A car expires _15 days after date_ _of commencement,_ it runs for the full 15 days after the day on which it was to commence." #### # - -~ B Similarly it has been stated in Stroud that "a bill of exchange, or note, is of the date expressed on its face, not the time when it is actually issued." . To the same effect is the decision in _Re F_ & _B Warren,_ [1938] Ch. 725 where it has been held that a judicial act will be referred to the first moment of the day on which it is done. A payment made by a bankrupt in the morning of a day is, therefore, not made, within section 45 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1914 _before the date of_ a receiving order made later in ### c the same day. The ratio of these also supports the view we have taken. The appeals fails and are dismissed. There would, however, be no order for costs. N.P.V. Appeals dismissed.