9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 1106X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the State as a Welfare State and the insurance premium is paid by the State to the Insurance Company, who in turn issue the policies. Thus, it is clearly an insurance contract wherein the policy is issued by the Insurance Company and the premium is paid by the State in discharging its obligation as a welfare State. The Scheme is clearly a 'socio-beneficial scheme' for the benefit of marginalised sections of the society. Insurance by its very nature is a contingent contract and the benefits of the insurance policy depend on the contingencies as indicated in the policy. Insurance in India is governed under the provisions of the Insurance Act, 1938 which authorizes and regulates the business of insurance in India. Essentially, the breach of terms of insurance policy is a 'tortuous liability' and but for any specific statutory enactment, (like M.V. Act, Employees Compensation Act, etc) gives a cause of action for filing a suit, in the event of breach of condition of policy - The Schedule appended to the 'Limitation Act' governs the period of limitation for filing a suit on account of breach of an insurance policy and Article 44(a) of the said Schedule p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... limitation as prescribed above by this Court treating them to be within limitation and the same should be processed on their merits - It is directed and provided for the limitation of three years, till the time the State Government takes an appropriate decision and amends limitation clauses of the Scheme to make them more reasonable taking into account the socio economic condition of the society as well the laws of India. Petition allowed. - Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 15983 of 2020 - - - Dated:- 11-11-2020 - Hon'ble Judges Shashi Kant Gupta and Pankaj Bhatia, JJ. For the Appellant : Ajay Kumar Maurya and Jawahar Lal Maurya For the Respondents : C.S.C. JUDGMENT Pankaj Bhatia, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. The present petition has been filed challenging the order dated Nil of 2020 (Annexure-9 to the petition), whereby the District Magistrate, Jaunpur has rejected the claim of the petitioner under the Mukhyamantri Kisan Avam Sarvahit Bima on the ground that the claim is time barred. 2. The facts, in brief, are that on 3.7.2018 the father of the petitioner died in an a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pany, the same is beyond the limitation prescribed and as the District Magistrate cannot condone the delay of more than one month, the claim is liable to be rejected. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has raised two fold submissions. Firstly, he argues that the impugned order is bad in law for the reason that the claim petition was filed within one month of obtaining the death certificate and as there was a delay in providing the death certificate, which is required to be annexed alongwith the claim, the claim ought to have been considered on its merits. 7. His second submission is that the Insurance Schemes including the present scheme 'Mukhyamantri Kisan Avam Sarvahit Bima' is a beneficial Scheme and the limitation of three months (and upto one month of the expiry of period of Insurance) as provided under the said Scheme as well as the provision for empowering the District Magistrate to condone the delay only upto one month, is wholly arbitrary, illegal and militates against the whole Scheme. 8. He argues that in view of the submissions made, the order deserves to be set aside and directions be issued for grant of compensation to the petitioner, as prayed for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed to Mukhyamantri Kisan and Sarvhit Bima Yojna vide G.O. GoUP511(1)b/Ka.Ni.-6/2017-20B(4)/2015, dated 20 June, 2017. vide partially amendment G.O. GOUP424 b/Ka.Ni.-6/2016-20B(4)/2015, dated 31 May, 2016. All the conditions stated in this agreements signed by the parties dated 14 Sep, 2016 as comprising of Request for Proposal (RFP), Prebid Response sheet and the Corrigendum Documents (as attached herewith) and letter of undertaking regarding renewal of insurance policy dated 6 Sep, 2017 shall form part and parcel of this Agreement for next policy period (i.e. from the midnight of 13 Sep, 2018 to the midnight of 13 Sep, 2019) . 2. The following documents attached hereto shall be the integral part of the Agreement: a. Request for proposal. b. Agreement dated 14. Sep, 2005 with all attachments. c. Corrigendum documents as Amendment in the Scheme. (Annx-X) d. Letter of undertaking regarding renewal of insurance policy by the insurance company. (Annx-Z) e. The payment Terms (Annx.-A) 3. Detail Scheme: Mukhyamantri Kisan and Sarvhit Bima Yojna as amended as below: 14. In the document appended in this Agreement, a copy of the Scheme was als ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ance Company and the premium is paid by the State in discharging its obligation as a welfare State. The Scheme is clearly a 'socio-beneficial scheme' for the benefit of marginalised sections of the society. 21. Insurance by its very nature is a contingent contract and the benefits of the insurance policy depend on the contingencies as indicated in the policy. Insurance in India is governed under the provisions of the Insurance Act, 1938 which authorizes and regulates the business of insurance in India. Essentially, the breach of terms of insurance policy is a 'tortuous liability' and but for any specific statutory enactment, (like M.V. Act, Employees Compensation Act, etc) gives a cause of action for filing a suit, in the event of breach of condition of policy. The Schedule appended to the 'Limitation Act' governs the period of limitation for filing a suit on account of breach of an insurance policy and Article 44(a) of the said Schedule provides for a period of three years' limitation for filing a suit from the date of the death of the deceased, or from the date when the claim is partly or wholly denied. It is well-settled that the provisions of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the nature which is under consideration by this Court has to be interpreted in a manner so as to achieve the object for which the Scheme is made and any prescription or provision/s which is/are for contrary to the statutory provisions has to be repelled more so in view of specific mandate of Section 46 of the Insurance Act as well as the specific Agreement in between the Insurance Companies and the State agreeing to the applicability of the laws as prevalent in India. 26. The Court cannot also ignore the social facts in the State of Uttar Pradesh, wherein the post death rituals extend for a reasonably long time and collection of documents required to be filed with claim (detailed in the scheme) take a longtime and to expect the family of the bereaved, that too illiterate to file a claim within a period of 45 days (maximum upto 75 days) as prescribed under the new Scheme and three months in the erstwhile schemes prima facie is wholly arbitrary and has the potential of frustrating the entire purpose of the Scheme which is to benefit the poor farmers. 27. Thus what is to be considered by this Court is whether the machinery/procedural provision providing the limitation for pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ration of Foreigners Additional Scheme, 1987 and considered it appropriate to draw the attention of the authorities to the issues involved in the case by directing as under: (SCC p. 618, para 22). 22. We are conscious of the fact that the issue is a matter of policy having financial and other implications. But where an issue involving public interest has not engaged the attention of those concerned with policy, or where the failure to take prompt decision on a pending issue is likely to be detrimental to public interest, Courts will be failing in their duty if they do not draw attention of the authorities concerned to the issue involved in appropriate cases. While Courts cannot be and should not be makers of policy, they can certainly be catalysts, when there is a need for a policy or a change in policy. 103. The correct approach in relation to the scope of judicial review of policy decisions of the State can hardly be stated in absolute terms. It will always depend upon the facts and circumstances of a given case. Furthermore, the Court would have to examine any elements of arbitrariness, unreasonableness and other constitutional facets in the policy decision of the St ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Scheme and the similar schemes which were in force prior thereto on behalf of beneficiaries of the Scheme. We hold so also keeping in mind that the procedure for raising a claim in the manner as provided in the Scheme by implication may bar remedy of filing suit by virtue of Section 9 of Civil Procedure Code. 34. We have no hesitation in holding that the limitation prescribed under the Scheme is wholly unreasonable and arbitrary and is liable to be struck out as it is well-settled that even while testing the validity of an administrative action, the same can be tested on the touch stone of the Article 14 of the Constitution of India. A socio-beneficial' Scheme has to be interpreted in a manner so as to advance the purpose for which the Scheme is formulated and not in a manner so as to defeat the entire purpose of the Scheme. 35. Thus, we set aside the order dated Nil March, 2020 (Annexure-9), whereby the claim of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground of limitation on both grounds as raised and discussed in this Judgment. 36. We further direct that in place of Limitation Prescribed under the Scheme, it should be read that the claims made within three years of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
