August 5, 2018:
The Author, Pinky Dass is a 4th Year student of Amity Law School, Delhi. She is currently interning with LatestLaws.com.
Third-party insurance is an insurance policy purchased for protection against the claims of another. One of the most common types is third-party insurance is automobile insurance. Third-party offers coverage against claims of damages and losses incurred by a driver who is not the insured, the principal, and is therefore not covered under the insurance policy. The driver who caused damages is the third party.
Motor Vehicle Insurance can be broadly categorised in two – Comprehensive and Third Party Insurance (TPI). Comprehensive Insurance covers Theft & Accidental damage for you and your vehicle. It’s the most complete protection you can get and provides cover up to the insured amount. TPI protects you from liability arising from your vehicle’s participation in an accident that led to the injury, death or damage of an arbitrary third party.
Section 145(g) “third party” includes the Government. National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Fakir Chand, “third party” should include everyone (other than the contracting parties to the insurance policy), be it a person traveling in another vehicle, one walking on the road or a passenger in the vehicle itself which is the subject matter of insurance policy
What is Motor Insurance Claim?
It involves damage to insured’s vehicle, damage to Third Party Motor Vehicle, injury or death of the third party, this where a third party claims compensation for injuries/death caused due to the negligence.
The insured will refer all claims for third party claims against them to professional insurance. Insured shall not enter into any negotiation or agree to settle the claim outside insurance without the corporations consent.
Analysis of ‘Third-Party Insurance’
Third-party insurance is essentially a form of liability insurance purchased by an insured (first party) from an insurer (second party) for protection against the claims of another (third party). The first party is responsible for their damages or losses, regardless of the cause of those damages.
There are two types of automobile third-party liability coverage. First, bodily injury liability covers costs resulting from injuries to a person. These injuries’ costs could include expenses like hospital care, lost wages, and pain and suffering due to the accident.
In India, Third Party Insurance is more than just a precautionary safe-guard: It is mandatory, and covers any financial liability the policy holder may incur from a third party damage liability covers costs resulting from damages to or loss of property. Examples of property damage include the payment to replace landscaping and mailboxes, as well as compensation for loss of use of a structure.
Third-party Insurance Significance
As required by law, drivers must carry at least a minimal amount of bodily injury liability and property damage liability coverage. A few states do not require both or have other limitations. Each state sets its minimum requirement for each type of coverage. Even in “no-fault” states, liability coverage is all but essential. No-fault laws were established to reduce or eliminate ordinary injury lawsuits affixed with low-dollar price tags and an overwhelming number of claims for pain and suffering. Still, no-fault laws do not protect the insured from million-dollar injury lawsuits stemming from seriously injured third parties. Both types of third-party insurance are important, specifically for individuals, such as homeowners, with substantial assets to protect. The more money and assets an insured has, the higher the limit should be for each type of liability coverage.
Other Types of Third-Party Liability Insurance
In most countries, third-party or liability insurance is compulsory insurance for any party that may potentially be sued by a third party. Public liability insurance involves industries or businesses that take part in processes or other activities that may affect third parties, such as subcontractors, architects, and engineers. Here, the third-party can be visitors, guests, or users of a facility. Most companies include public liability insurance in their insurance portfolio to protect against damage to property or personal injury.
Product liability insurance is typically mandated by legislation, the scale of which varies by country and often varies by industry. This type of insurance covers all major product classes and types, including chemicals, agricultural products, and recreational equipment; and protects companies against lawsuits over products or components that cause damage or injury.
What is third party liability car insurance in India?
Third party liability is basically a risk cover whereby in case of an unfortunate event, your insurer will compensate you to the extent of your legal liability in such a situation. It is important to note that as per Section 146 of Motor Vehicles Act 1988, third party insurance is mandatory & one cannot ply a vehicle on Indian roads without this insurance.
What does third party insurance cover?
- Third party liability insurance covers death of or bodily injury to any person including occupants carried in the vehicle.
- Damage to property other than property belonging to the Insured or held in trust or in the custody or control of the Insured
What usually Third Party Insurance not covers?
- The cost of damage to your car.
- The cost incurred by you during vehicle breakdown.
- The cost of accidental hospitalization expenses.
How much does it cost?
- The good thing about third party car insurance is that it is very cheap. For example, if you go for a comprehensive car insurance for a mid segment car (which covers own damage along with third party liability), it will cost you in the range of Rs. 10,000- Rs.12,000. However, if you buy only a third party liability cover, it will come in less than Rs. 1,000, which is a small fraction of overall cover. Also, since third party cover is mandated by law, you’ll not find a differential pricing between different insures and premium will be more or less the same irrespective of the insurer you choose.
Before you purchase a third party insurance cover, make sure your insurer is registered with the Insurance & Regulatory Authority of India (IRDA).
How to claim Third Party Insurance?
- Note down the registration numbers of all vehicles involved in an accident.
- Note down the name and contact details of witnesses.
- Report the accident to nearest police station.
- Inform to an insurance company about the accident.
- Submit the claim form duly signed, police FIR copy, Driving License copy, policy copy and an RC copy of the vehicle
Documents needed at the time of claim:
In case of third party liability car insurance, you’ll need to first intimate the insurer about the damage by calling on their customer care. Insurer will arrange to tow the vehicle to the nearest garage. For making a claim, you’ll need to submit the following documents to your insurer:
- A claim form duly signed by the insured
- Driving license copy
- Police FIR copy
- RC copy of the vehicle
- Company stamp in case of company registered vehicle’s original documents
- Copy of policy document
How to get Third Party Insurance?
Most Comprehensive policies include a Third party cover with the Policy. This works well as both benefits are delivered with a single policy.
Options to purchase a standalone Comprehensive Insurance, with a TPI Policy as an add-on are also available, and cater to those looking for the best value. Purchasing Comprehensive and TPI separately enables you to cherry-pick each policy individually, potentially increasing benefits while maximizing savings.
Why do you need Third Party Insurance?
In addition to the Statutory Requirements for TPI in India, there are a number of benefits to having a robust TPI policy, including –
- Protection against the unknown –
While comprehensive insurance has a fixed cover amount based on the insured vehicle’s value, a TPI policy protects the insured from potentially higher liabilities faced in the event of any incident with a third party. This is of particular significance as in most cases compensation/pay-outs are decided based on the effected third party’s particulars
- Towards end of vehicle’s life –
In the case of vehicles over a decade old, and whose current value is deemed to be under INR 50,000/- it may not be viable to renew Comprehensive insurance policies year after year. In such vehicles, TPI ensures they are protected from any outward incidents which may occur, as well as being lawfully insured.
Salient Features of Third Party Insurance:
- Third party insurance is compulsory for all motor vehicles. In Govindan v. New India Assurance Co. Lt.,Third party risks insurance is mandatory under the statute .This provision cannot be overridden by any clause in the insurance policy.
- Third party insurance does not cover injuries to the insured himself but to the rest of the world who is injured by the insured.
- Beneficiary of third party insurance is the injured third party, the insured or the policy holder is only nominally the beneficiary of the policy. In practice the money is always paid direct by the insurance company to the third party (or his solicitor) and does not even pass through the hands of the insured person.
- In third party policies the premiums do not vary with the value of what is being insured because what is insured is the ‘legal liability’ and it is not possible to know in advance what that liability will be.
- Third party insurance is almost entirely fault-based.(means you have to prove the fault of the insured first and also that injury occurred from the fault of the insured to claim damages from him)
- Third party insurance involves lawyers aid
- The third party insurance is unpopular with insurance companies as compared to first party insurance, because they never know the maximum amounts they will have to pay under third party policies.
Some Myths about Third Party Insurance:
- Third party insurance covers the cost of damage to the owner’s vehicle-You are not the third party. Hence, no expenses will be compensated by an insurance company.
- Third Party Insurance costs more-It is available at very cheap rate. It usually depends on the engine capacity of your vehicle.
- Vehicle owner eligible for NCB (No Claim Bonus) if no claim-You get NCB only in case of vehicle insurance. However, in third party insurance, there is no such facility called NCB.
- Insurance company settles the claim-In case of third party vehicle insurance, it is not an insurance company, but the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal is the final authority to reject or accept the claim.
Third Party Motor Claims In Indian Insurance
The Motor Vehicles (MV) Act, 1988 mandates payment of compensation to the victims of accidents arising out of the use of a motor vehicle or motor vehicles, in public places by the owner or owners, as the case may. The MV Act further provides that no person shall use a motor vehicle in public places without a policy of insurance complying with the requirements of the MV Act. In such a policy of insurance, the insurer agrees to indemnify the user of the vehicle against the legal liability to pay compensation payable to the victims (third parties) of accidents (death, injury, disability, property damages, etc.) arising out of the use of the motor vehicle.
Apart from the legal liabilities to third parties, the general insurers also cover pecuniary losses arising out of damages to the vehicle of the insured. This insurance cover is commonly known as Own Damage Cover. The motor insurance portfolio has, thus, two distinct sections – one relating to the cover for the vehicle and its physical damage (OD) and the other relating to injury or death of other parties (TP). The cover for OD is optional and the cover for TP is mandatory. The Motor Third Party policies have to comply with the requirements of the MV Act. The compensation payable to the claimants is determined by he Motor Accident Claims Tribunals (MACT) established under the MV Act.
The motor portfolio constitutes around 40 per cent of the non-life insurance premium underwritten in India. The motor policies were governed by the tariff prescribed by Tariff Advisory Committee.
Sections 140 to 144 provides for interim compensation on ‘No Fault’ Basis. According to this provision Rs. 50,000/- is to be given to the kith and kin of the deceased and Rs. 25,000/- to the grievously injured victim. The compensation under Section 140 is made payable if prima facie evidence of following is available;
(1) Accident by the offending vehicle;
(2) Offending vehicle being insured;
(3) Death or grievous injuries have been caused.
(Section 145 to 164) provides for compulsory third party insurance, which is required to be taken by every vehicle owner. It has been specified in Section 146(1) that no person shall use or allow using a motor vehicle in public place unless there is in force a policy of insurance complying with the requirement of this chapter. Section 147 provides for the requirement of policy and limit of liability. Every vehicle owner is required to take a policy covering against any liability which may be incurred by him in respect of death or bodily injury including owner of goods or his authorized representative carried in the vehicle or damage to the property of third party and also death or bodily injury to any passenger of a public service vehicle. According to this section the policy not require covering the liability of death or injuries arising to the employees in the course of employment except to the extent of liability under Workmen Compensation Act. Under Section 149 the insurer have been statutorily liable to satisfy the judgment and award against the person insured in respect of third party risk.
Insurance Companies have been allowed no other defense except the following: –
- Use of vehicle for hire and reward not permit to ply such vehicle.
- For organizing racing and speed testing;
- Use of transport vehicle not allowed by permit.
- Driver not holding valid driving license or have been disqualified for holding such license.
- Policy taken is void as the same is obtained by non-disclosure of material fact.
Historical Background of Third Party Insurance in India
Chapter VIII of the 1939 Act and Chapter XI of the 1988 Act have been enacted on the pattern of several English statutes which is evident from the report of ‘Motor Vehicles Insurance Committee,1936-1937’In order to find out the real intention for enacting Ss.96 of the 1939 Act which corresponds to Ss.149 of the 1988 Act, it is relevant to trace the historical development of the law for compulsory third –party insurance in England. Prior to 1930, there was no law of compulsory insurance in respect of third party rights in England. As and when an accident took place an injured used to bring action against the motorist for recovery of damages.
But in many cases it was found that the owner of the offending vehicle had no means to pay to the injured or the dependant of the deceased and in such a situation the claimants were unable to recover damages. It is under such circumstances that various legislations were enacted. To meet the situation it is for the first time ‘the Third Parties’ Rights Against Insurance Act,1930’ was enacted in England. The provision of this Act found place in S.97 of the 1939 Act which gave to the third party a right to sue insurer directly. Subsequently, ‘the road traffic Act,1930’ was enacted which provided for compulsory insurance for Motor Vehicles. The provisions of this Act were engrafted in S.95 of the 1939 Act and S.146 of the 1988 Act. It is relevant that under S.38 of the English Act of 1930, certain conditions of insurance policy were made ineffective so far as third parties were concerned .The object behind the provision was that the third party should not suffer on account of failure of the insured to comply with those terms of the insurance policy.
Subsequently in 1934, the second Road Traffic Act was enacted. The object of this legislation was to satisfy the liability of the insured. Under this enactment three actions were provided .The first was to satisfy the award passed against the insured. The second was that, in case the insurer did not discharge its liability the claimant had the right to execute decree against the insurer. However, in certain events, namely, what was provided in section Ss.96(2)(a) which corresponds to section 149 (2)(a) of the 1988 Act, the insurer could defend his liability.
The third action provided for was contained in S.10(3) of the Road Traffic Act. Under this provision, the insurer could defend his liability to satisfy decree on the ground that insurance policy was obtained due to misrepresentation or fraud. This provision also found place in S.149 (2)(b) of the 1988 Act. While enacting the 1939 Act and the 1988 Act, all the three actions were engrafted in S.96 of the 1939 Act and Section 149 of the 1988 Act. However neither the 1939 Act, nor the 1988 Act conferred greater rights on the insurer than what had been conferred in English Law. Thus, in common law, an insurer was not permitted to contest a claim of a claimant on merits, i.e. offending vehicle was not negligent or there was contributory negligence. The insurer could contest the claim only on statutory defences specified for in the statute. Thus while enacting Chapter VIII of the 1939 Act or Chapter XI of the 1988 Act, the intention of the legislature was to protect third party rights and not the insurers even though they may be nationalized companies.”
Prohibition on use of motor vehicles without statutory insurance policy, object of is to enable the third party suffering injuries from use of the motor vehicle to get damages irrespective of the financial capacity or solvency of the driver or the owner
Claim application can be filed under Section 163A for claim to be determined on structural formula basis provided in Schedule-II. Schedule-II has been adjudged as suffering from severe mistakes and the Supreme Court has held that total reliance cannot be placed on this schedule. Further the Schedule do not provide any computation chart for the persons having more than Rs.40, 000/- annual income. Claim petition can also be filed under Section 166 of Motor Vehicle Act pleading negligence where the claim shall be assessed by the Judge not on the basis of structural formula but on the basis of evidence led.
Accidents arising out of use of Motor Vehicle:
Section 165 provides the form of constitution of Claim Tribunal in adjudging claims of compensation in respect of accidents involving the death of bodily injury to persons “arising out of the use of Motor Vehicle”. Being welfare legislation the scope of this term has been widened which includes accident by a stationery vehicle, injuries suffered by passengers in bomb blast, injuries due to fire in petrol tanker. Murder in a motor vehicle has also been covered as a motor accident.
Assessment of Claim:
The assessment of compensation, however, be made good but cannot be said to be fool proof. In every such assessment certain assumptions are to be made and there is all possibility of variance from Judge to Judge in applying the various principles enunciated by the Courts from time to time. Lord Viscount Simon has evolved a method of assessment known as “Nance’s method” more popularly as “discounting method”.
Legal defense available to the Insurance Industry towards third party:
The Indian Insurance Industry cannot avoid the liability except on the grounds and not any other ground, which have been provided in Section 149(2). In recent time, Supreme Court while dealing with the provisions of third party motor has held that even if the defense has been pleaded and proved by the Insurance Industry, they are not absolve from liability to make payment to the third party but can receive such amount from the owner insured. The courts one after one have held that the burden of proving availability of defense is on Insurance Industry and Insurance Industry has not only to lead evidence as to breach of condition of policy or violation of provisions of Section 149(2) but has to prove also that such act happens with the connivance or knowledge of the owner. If knowledge or connivance has not been proved, the Insurance Industry shall remain liable even if defense is available.
Earlier not holding a valid driving license was a good defense to the Insurance Industry to avoid liability. It was been held by the Supreme Court that the Insurance Industry is not liable for claim if driver is not holding effective & valid driving license. It has also been held that the learner’s license absolves the insurance Industry from liability, but later Supreme Court in order to give purposeful meaning to the Act have made this defense very difficult.
In Sohan Lal Passi’s v. P. Sesh Reddy it has been held for the first time by the Supreme Court that the breach of condition should be with the knowledge of the owner. If owner’s knowledge with reference to fake driving licence held by driver is not proved by the Insurance Company, such defence, which was otherwise available, can not absolve insurer from the liability. Recently in a dynamic judgment in case of Swaran Singh, the Supreme Court has almost taken away the said right by holding;
(i) Proving breach of condition or not holding driving licence or holding fake licence or carrying gratuitous passenger would not absolve the Insurance Company until it is proved that the said breach was with the knowledge of owner.
(ii) Learner’s licence is a licence and will not absolve Insurance Company from liability.
(iii) The breach of the conditions of the policy even within the scope of Section 149(2) should be material one which must have been effect cause of accident and thereby absolving requirement of driving licence to those accidents with standing vehicle, fire or murder during the course of use of vehicle.
This judgment has created a landmark history and is a message to the Government to remove such defence from the legislation as the victim has to be given compensation
A gratuitous or fare paying passenger in a goods vehicle or fare paying passenger in private vehicle has been proved to be a good defense. In Motor Vehicle Act 1939 the gratuitous passenger was not covered under the insurance policy but a fare passenger in a goods vehicle was considered to be covered by 5 Judges Bench judgment of Rajasthan High Court. In new Motor Vehicle Act, a Division Bench of Supreme Court held that Insurance Company is liable for a passenger in goods vehicle. In another judgment of 3 Judges Bench of Supreme Court it was held that the Insurance Company is not liable for the gratuitous passenger traveling in the goods vehicle. In number of other cases this judgment has been reiterated with a direction that the Insurance Company shall first make payment of the compensation to the claimant and then recover it from the owner.
Dishonour of cheque of insurance premium
It has been held by the Supreme Court that once the Cover Note is issued the Insurance Company is bound to make payment to a third party and can recover amount from owner. This judgment deserves to be reviewed else Section 64 VB of Insurance Act will become non-existent. This judgment can give momentum to those persons who will get the insurance and will get their cheque been bounced as the liability of Insurance Company will run for another one year without there being a premium.
Transfer of Vehicle
Transfer of a vehicle prior to accident has been held to be not valid defense for the purpose of third party liability. It can be a defense for own damage but as far as third party liability, even the vehicle has been transferred and policy has not been transferred, liability of Insurance Company shall remain there.
There are plans afoot to limit third party motor insurance claims to RM100, 000 inclusive of hospitalization, rehabilitation, pain and suffering, loss of income and future earnings. The new scheme would involve insurers accepting all kinds of motor insurance including third party and comprehensive. The entire third party premium including the third party cover in comprehensive insurance would be carved out to a pool shared by all insurers. Unlike the existing Malaysian Motor Insurance Pool where it was the insurer of last resort, the new pool would have all third party coverage.
It suggested insurer would charge a higher premium while at the same time introduce a cap on third party bodily injury and death benefits to ensure that the new pool was profitable or at least broke even. Comprehensive premium might also be raised partly due to the third party component. However, it added the premium charge for comprehensive coverage might differ from individual to individual given that more factors might be introduced like age, driving habit, area of driving, driving record and type of car to determine the premium instead of the current practice of only using sum insured and cubic capacity of the car.
The insurers would only have the profitable comprehensive coverage in their book if the new scheme were implemented. The sector’s growth prospects were improving driven by 4.5 per cent Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth in 2010, rising public awareness on insurance protections, low penetration rate and further liberalization on the sector.
Right of recovery from owner to Insurance Company
With the development of law, liability of the insurance Company has been made strict to the third party even if there is no negligence or defense to the Insurance Company are available. A right has been given to the Insurance Company by way of legal precedents incorporating various provisions to recover the said amount paid to third party from owner. This recovery can be made by mere filing of an execution application and not by a separate civil suit.
Nature and Extent of Insurer’s Liability (section 147)
According to the provisions of this section the policy of insurance must be issued by an authorized insurer. It must be as per requirements as specified in subsection (2).It must insure against liability in respect of death or bodily injury or damage to property of a third party. “Third party” includes owner of the goods or his authorized representative carried in the vehicle and any passenger of a public service vehicle.
The policy of insurance must cover:
1.Liability under the Workmen’s compensation Act,1923 in respect of death or bodily injury to any such employee
(a) engaged in driving the vehicle, or
(b) the conductor or ticket examiner if it is a public service vehicle, or
Section 147 has to be given wider, effective and practical meaning so that it may benefit various categories of persons entitling them to claim compensation from the insurer or the insured or both. Insurer’s liability commences as soon as the contract of insurance comes into force. The liability remains in existence during the operation of the policy. If the existing policy is renewed the risk is covered from the moment the renewal of the policy comes into force. If the accident occurs before the renewal comes into existence, the insurer cannot be made liable. It is the primary duty of the vehicle owner to prove that his vehicle was insured with a particular company. If he fails to comply with it he will have to pay the entire amount of compensation in the case. In case where there is a dispute in respect of the vehicle having been insured by an assurance company, the tribunal must give its finding in the matter, it is its duty to do so. After a certificate of insurance is issued it does not lie in the mouth of the insurer to deny his liability. If the insurer has been a victim of fraud he can recover the amount from the insured by a separate action against him.
Oriental Insurance Co. v. Inderjit Kaur
If the insurer has issued a policy to cover the bus without receiving the premium therefore, he has to indemnify third parties in respect of the liability covered by the policy. He cannot avoid the liability arguing that he was entitled to avoid or cancel the contract.
Liability for injury to certain persons or class of persons (other than gratuitous passengers and pillion riders)
The policy under the Act covers only third party risks. Insurer is not liable for any harm suffered by a passenger traveling in a private car neither for hire nor for reward. Similar is the position of a pillion rider on a scooter.
K. Gopal Krishnan v. Sankara Narayana
In this case Madras High Court observed that a scooter-owner is not bound to take out a third party risk policy to cover the claim of the pillion rider that is carried gratuitously. If he is injured , the insurance company would not be liable unless policy covering such risk is obtained by the scooter-owner. A private carrier registered as such with R.T.O. and also in insurance policy , cannot be used for carrying any passenger or goods for hire or reward. However if it is so used and the employees of a party hiring the private vehicle belonging to the insured are injured in an accident the insurance company will not be liable.
Insurer’s liability to Vehicle-owner
A contract of insurance is a personal contract between the insurer and the insured. It is for the purpose of indemnifying the insured for damage caused due to accident by the vehicle , to a third party. To make the insurer liable the policy of insurance must be in the name of the owner of the vehicle. Owner of the vehicle as defined in Section 2(30) is a person in whose name the motor vehicle stands registered.
A person in possession of a vehicle under a hire-purchase agreement or an agreement of lease or hypothecation is also covered by the definition, no matter he has exercised his option to purchase the vehicle or not. Section 157(1) makes it clear that when the owner of a vehicle transfers the ownership of the vehicle , the policy of insurance and the certificate of insurance shall be deemed to have been transferred in favour of the purchaser of the vehicle with effect from the date of its transfer. This deemed transfer shall include transfer of rights and liabilities of the said certificate of insurance and policy of insurance.
According to subsection (2) the transferee has to apply within 14 days from the date of transfer to the insurer for effecting necessary changes in the certificate and in the policy of insurance. If the certificate of insurance and the policy are not transferred , the insurer could not be made liable even though the vehicle is transferred. It is to be remembered that “an insurance policy is a personal contract between the parties for indemnifying the insured in case of an accident covered under the policy. If the vehicle is transferred by an insured to another person, the insurance policy lapses upon the transfer. In such a case the benefit of the policy is not available to the transferee, without an express agreement with the insurance company. When the insurance policy lapses it would not be available to cover the liability of the purchaser of the vehicle.
S.Sudhakaran v. A.K.Francis,
There was an agreement for sale of a vehicle. The owner did not comply with the statutory provisions regarding transfer of a vehicle. He, however ,allowed the vehicle to be used by the transferee .The owner had retained the insurance policy with him. Held— The insurance company was not liable to indemnify the owner.
Liability in respect of damage to property [S.147(2)]
For damage to property of a third party under 1939 Act the limit of liability is Rs 6000 in all, irrespective of the class of the vehicle. Under 1988 Act the position as laid down by section 147 (2) in regard to liability is as under:
- For death or personal injury to a third party, the liability of the insurer is the amount of liability incurred, i.e. for the whole amount of liability.
- For damage to property of a third party the liability of the insurer is limited to Rs. 6000 as was under the 1939 Act.
Liability of Insurer beyond the limits mentioned in the Act
Section 147 lays down the limits of liability of the insurer. However there is no bar for the insurer undertaking a higher liability i.e. liability for a greater amount than that mentioned in the Act. Thus the insured and the insurer can contract and can provide for a higher liability.
- Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
- Motor Vehicles Act, 1939
- Avatar Singh, Law of Insurance
 AIR 1995 J&K 91
 AIR 1999 SC 1398
 AIR 1996 SC 2627
 National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Swaran Singh & Ors on 5 January, 2004
 AIR 1998 SC 588
 Section 147 of the 1988 Act, or Section 95 of the 1939 Act
 AIR 1968 Mad 438
 Raj Chopra vs. Sangara Singh, 1985 ACJ 209 (P&H)
 AIR 1997 Ker 26