http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: RAM DAYAL AND ORS.

DATE OF JUDGMENT20/04/1990

BENCH: MISRA RANGNATH BENCH: MISRA RANGNATH RAMASWAMY, K.

CITATION:  1990 SCR  (2) 570        1990 SCC  (2) 680  JT 1990 (2)   164        1990 SCALE  (1)783

ACT:     Motor  Vehicles  Act,   1939.’  Insurance   Policy--When becomes effective.

HEADNOTE:     In  a claim for compensation, the Motor Accident  Claims Tribunal  held that the insurer was not liable to  meet  the award  of compensation against the owner of the vehicle,  as the policy had been taken after the 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 became liable. Dismissing the appeals by the insurer, this Court.     HELD:  When a policy is taken on a particular date,  its effectiveness is from the commencement of the date.     In  the instant case, the insurance was taken from  28th September, 1984, which is the date of the accident. The High Court was, therefore, right in holding that the insurer  was liable  in  terms of the Act to meet the  liability  of  the owner under the award. [571F-G]     Jaddoo Singh & Anr. v. Smt. Malti Devi & Anr., AIR  1983 All. 87, approved. In re. F.B. Warren, [1938] Ch. 725, referred to. Stroud’s Judicial Dictionary, referred to.

JUDGMENT:     CIVIL  APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos.  188-89 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. 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  compensa-

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

tion under the Motor Vehicles Act of 1939.     The insurer repudiated its liability by maintaining that the policy had been taken after the accident and, therefore, it  had  no  liability to 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--i.e.  from the previous mid-night and  since  the accident  took place on the date of 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 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  inability  of  the owner under the award.     As  pointed out in Stroud’s judicial  Dictionary  ’Date’ means day, so that where a cover not providing for temporary insurance of a motor 572 car expires 15 days after date of commencement, it runs  for the full 15 days after the day on which it was to commence."     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  Bank- ruptcy  Act, 1914 before the date of a receiving order  made later in the same day. The ratio of these also supports the view we have taken.     The appeals fails and are dismissed. There would, howev- er, be no order for costs. N.P.V.                                         Appeals  dis- missed. 573