Madras High Court
Indian Institute Of Insurance vs Government Of India on 24 November, 2021
W.P.No.9972 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.11.2021
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI,
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU
W.P.No.9972 of 2021 & WMP.Nos.10597 & 10604 of 2021
Indian Institute of Insurance
Surveyors and Loss Assessors
Tamil Nadu Chapter rep.by its
authorized representative
Mr.A.R.Ramesh .. Petitioner
Vs
1.Government of India
Ministry of Finance Rep. by its Secretary
North Block New Celhi 110001.
2.Insurance Regulatory and Development
Authority (IRDA) Rep. by its
Chairman, Parishram Bhavan,
3rd Floor, Basheer Bagh, Hyderabad 500004.
3.United india Insurace Co.Ltd
Rep. by its CEO/CMD, 24 Whites Road
Chennai 600 014.
4.ACKO General Insurance Ltd.
Rep. by its CEO/CMD, Unit No.301 and 302
___________
Page 1 of 24
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.9972 of 2021
3rd Floor, F wing, Lotus Corporate Park Off
Western Express Highway, Goregaon East,
Mumbai 400063.
5.Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co.Ltd.
Rep. by its CEO/CMD, Bajaj Allianz House,
Airport Road, Yerawada, Pune
411006.
6.Bharti AXA General Insurance
Co.Ltd., Rep. by its CEO/CMD, 19th Floor
Parinee Crescenzo, G Block, Bandrakurla
Complex, Opposite MCA Club, Bandra (E),
Mumbai 400051.
7.Cholamandalam MS General Insurance
Co.Ltd., Rep. by its CEO/CMD, Dare
House, 2nd Floor, No.2, NSC Bose Road
Chennai 600001.
8.Navi General Insurance Ltd.,
Rep. by its CEO/CMD, 402 403
and 404 A and B Wing, 4th Floor,
Fulcrum Sahar Road, Next to Hya Regency
Andheri (East) Mumbai
400099.
9.Edlweiss General Insurance Co.Ltd.
Rep. by its CEO/CMD, Edleweiss
House, Off CST Road, Kalina, Mumbai 400098.
10.Furture General India Insurance
Co.Ltd., Rep. by its CEO/CMD, India
Bulls Finance Centre, 6th Floor, Tower 3,
Senapa Bapat Marg, Elhinstone Road (w),
Mumbai 400013.
11.Go Digit General Insurance ltd.,
Rep. by its CEO/CMD, Smart works
___________
Page 2 of 24
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.9972 of 2021
Business Center, 1st Floor, Nya Unitree
West Wing, Samarat Ashok Road, Yerawada,
Pune 411006.
12.HDFC ERGO General Insurance
Co.Ltd., Rep. by its CEO/CMD, HDFC House,
1st Floor, 165 -166, Back bay Reclamaon, H.T.
Pareks Marg, Churchgate, Mumbai 400020.
13.ICICI Lombard General Insurace
Co.Ltd., Rep. by its CEO/CMD, ICICI
Lombard House, 414, Veer Savarkar Marg, Near
Siddhivinayak Temple, Prabhadevi, Mumbai
400025.
14.IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Co.Ltd.,
Rep. by its CEO/CMD, IFFCO
Tower II, 4th and 5h Floor, Plot No.3
Sector 29, Gurugram-122001.
15.Kotak Mahindra General Insurance
Co.Ltd.,Rep. by its CEO/CMD, 8th
Floor, Kotak Towers, Building No.21,
Infinity Park off Western Express Highway
Malad (E) Mumbai 400 09
16.Liberty General Insurance Ltd.,
Rep. by its CEO/CMD, 109th Floor,
Tower A, Peninsula Business Park, G.K.Marg
Lower Parel, Mumbai 400013
17.Magma HDI General Insurance
Co.Ltd. Rep. by is CEO/CMD, 401, 4th
Floor, Rustomjee Aspiree, Off. Eastern
Express Highway, Imax Dome Theatre Road,
Sion (East), Mumbai 400022.
18.National insurance Co.Ltd.
Rep. by its CEO/CMD, 3, Middleton Street,
___________
Page 3 of 24
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.9972 of 2021
Prafulla Chandra Sensarani, Kolkata 700071.
19.Raheja QBE General Insurance Co.Ltd.
Rep. By its CEO/CMD, Windsor
House, 5th Floor, CST Road Kalina,
Santa Cruz (East), Mumbai 400098.
20.Reliance General Insurance Co.Ltd.,
Rep. by its CEO/CMD, Reliance
Centre, 6th Floor, North Wing, Off Western
Express Highway, Santacruz (East), Mumbai
400005.
21.Royal sundarm General Insurance,
Rep. by its CEO/CMD, Vishranthi
Melaram Towers, No.2/319, Rajiv Gandhi Salai
(OMR). Karapakkam, Chennai 600097.
22.SBI General Insurance Co.Ltd,
Rep. by its CEO/CMD, 'Natraj', 301,
Junction of Western Express Highway,
Andheri - Kurla Road Andheri (East) Mumbai
400069.
23.Shriram General Insurance Co.Ltd.,
Rep. by its CEO/CMD, E-8, EPIP
RIICO Industrial Area, Sitapura, Jaipur
302022.
24.Tata AIG General Insurance Co.Ltd.,
Rep. by its CEO/CMD, Peninsula
Business Park, Tower A, 15h Floor, G.K.Marg,
Lower Parel, Mumbai 400013.
25.The New India Assurance Co.Ltd.,
Rep. by its CEO/CMD, 87, M.G.Road,
Fort, Mumbai 400001.
26.The Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd.,
___________
Page 4 of 24
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.9972 of 2021
Rep. by its CEO/CMD Oriental House,
A25/27, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi-110002.
27.Universal Sompo General Insurance
Co.Ltd., Rep. by its CEO/CMD Unit,
No.401, 4th floor, Sangam Complex, 127,
Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri (E), Mumbai
400059. .. Respondents
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a
Writ of Declaration declaring Section 64 UM(8)(c) of the Insurance Act
as unconstitutional and ultra vires under Articles 14, 21 and 19(1)(g)
and consequently delcare the Notification dated 14/07/2015 vide
Ref.No.IRDA/NL/Cir/Misc/129/07/2015 issued by the 2nd respondent
as illegal and void and issue such order or other orders any other writ
order or direction directing 1st respondent in the nature of the
declaring Section 64UM(8) of the Insurance Act as null and void and
consequentially forbearing respondents 3 to 27 from engaging
unauthorized personnel for carrying out survey and assessment of
motor own damage loss in respect of claims up to Rs.50 000/- under
the pretense of empanelment of loss assessment agencies and direct
the second respondent to issue directions to the insurers at large
mandating them to employ only approved surveyors or loss assessors
for claims below Rs.50,000/- as well in accordance with Section 64UM
of the Insurance Act.
For the Petitioner : Mr.V.Prakash
Senior Counsel
For the Respondents : Mr.R.Sankaranarayanan,
ASG-I assisted by
Mr.A.Kumaraguru, SPC for
R1
Mr.M.B.Raghavan for M/s.
___________
Page 5 of 24
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.9972 of 2021
M.B.Gopalan & Associates
for R2
Mr.S.Arunkumar for R3, R7,
R14 and R17
Mr.S.Stanley John for R6
and R13
No appearance for R5, R8,
R11, R12, R13, R18, R20,
R21, R23 and R25 to R27
R4, R9, R10, R15, R16, R19,
R22 and R24 deleted from
cause list vide order dated
24.11.2021
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by
the Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice)
The challenge to Section 64UM(8) of the Insurance Act, 1938
(hereinafter the Act of 1938) has been made with a prayer to declare it
to be ultra vires The Constitution of India.
2. For ready reference, Section 64UM is quoted hereunder :
“64UM. Surveyors or loss assessors. —(1) Save
as otherwise provided in this Section, no person shall
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.9972 of 2021
act as a surveyor or loss assessor in respect of general
insurance business after the expiry of a period of one
year from the commencement of the Insurance Laws
(Amendment) Act, 2015 (5 of 2015), unless he— (a)
possesses such academic qualifications as may be
specified by the regulations made under this Act; and
(b) is a member of a professional body of surveyors and
loss assessors, namely, the Indian Institute of Insurance
Surveyors and Loss Assessors: Provided that in the case
of a firm or company, all the partners or directors or
other persons, who may be called upon to make a
survey or assess a loss reported, as the case may be,
shall fulfill the requirements of clauses (a) and (b).
(2) Every surveyor and loss assessor shall
comply with the code of conduct in respect of his duties,
responsibilities and other professional requirements, as
may be specified by the regulations made under the Act.
(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in the
foregoing provisions, a class or class of persons acting
as a licensed surveyor or loss assessor prior to the
commencement of the Insurance Laws (Amendment)
Act, 2015 (5 of 2015) shall continue to act as such for
such period as may be specified by the regulations made
under this Act: Provided that the surveyor or loss
assessor shall, within the period as may be notified by
the Authority, satisfy the requirements of clause (a) and
clause (b) of Sub-Section (1), failing which, the
surveyor or loss assessor shall be automatically
disqualified to act as a surveyor or loss assessor.
(4) No claim in respect of a loss which has
occurred in India and requiring to be paid or settled in
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.9972 of 2021
India equal to or exceeding an amount specified in the
regulations by the Authority in value on any policy of
insurance, arising or intimated to an insurer at any time
after the expiry of a period of one year from the
commencement of the Insurance Laws (Amendment)
Act, 2015 (5 of 2015), shall, unless otherwise directed
by the Authority, be admitted for payment or settled by
the insurer unless he has obtained a report, on the loss
that has occurred, from a person who holds a licence
issued under this Section to act as a surveyor or loss
assessor (hereafter referred to as “approved surveyor or
loss assessor”): Provided that nothing in this Sub-
Section shall be deemed to take away or abridge the
right of the insurer to pay or settle any claim at any
amount different from the amount assessed by the
approved surveyor or loss assessor.
(5) The Authority may, at any time, in respect of
any claim of the nature referred to in Sub-Section (4),
call for an independent report from any other approved
surveyor or loss assessor specified by him and such
surveyor or loss assessor shall furnish such report to the
Authority within such time as may be specified by the
Authority or if no time limit has been specified by him
within a reasonable time and the cost of, or incidental
to, such report shall be borne by the insurer.
(6) The Authority may, on receipt of a report
referred to in Sub-Section (5), issue such directions as it
may consider necessary with regard to the settlement of
the claim including any direction to settle a claim at a
figure less than, or more than, that at which it is
proposed to settle it or it was settled and the insurer
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.9972 of 2021
shall be bound to comply with such directions: Provided
that where the Authority issues a direction for settling a
claim at a figure lower than that at which it has already
been settled, the insurer shall be deemed to comply with
such direction if he satisfies the Authority that all
reasonable steps, with due regard to the question
whether the expenditure involved is not disproportionate
to the amount required to be recovered, have been
taken with due dispatch by him: Provided further that
no direction for the payment of a lesser sum shall be
made where the amount of the claim has already been
paid and the Authority is of opinion that the recovery of
the amount paid in excess would cause undue hardship
to the insured: Provided also that nothing in this Section
shall relieve the insurer from any liability, civil or
criminal, to which he would have been subject but for
the provisions of this Sub-Section.
(7) No insurer shall, after the expiry of a period
of one year from the commencement of the Insurance
Laws (Amendment) Act, 2015 (5 of 2015) pay to any
person any fee or remuneration for surveying, verifying
or reporting on a claim of loss under a policy of
insurance unless the person making such survey,
verification or report is an approved surveyor or loss
assessor.
(8) Where, in the case of a claim of less than the
amount specified in Sub-Section (4) in value on any
policy of insurance it is not practicable for an insurer to
employ an approved surveyor or loss assessor without
incurring expenses disproportionate to the amount of
the claim, the insurer may employ any other person (not
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.9972 of 2021
being a person disqualified for the time being for being
employed as a surveyor or loss assessor) for surveying
such loss and may pay such reasonable fee or
remuneration to the person so employed as he may
think fit.
(9) The Authority may in respect of any claim of
value of less than the amount specified in Sub-Section
(4) on an insurance policy, if the claim has not been or
is not proposed to be reported upon by a surveyor or
loss assessor, direct that such claim shall be reported
upon by an approved surveyor or loss assessor and
where the Authority makes such direction, the
provisions of Sub-Sections (5) and (6) shall apply in
respect of such claim.
(10) Where, in relation to any class of claims, the
Authority is satisfied that it is customary to entrust the
work of survey or loss assessment to any person other
than a licensed surveyor or loss assessor, or it is not
practicable to make any survey or loss assessment, it
may, by an order, exempt such class of claims from the
operation of this Section.] .”
3. The challenge to Section 64UM(8) is precisely on the ground
that in the case of a claim of less than the amount specified in Sub-
Section (4) of Section 64UM in value on any policy of the insurance, if
it is not practicable for any insurer to employ an approved surveyor or
loss assessor without incurring expenses disproportionate to the
amount that has been claimed, the Insurer may employ any other
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.9972 of 2021
person.
4. The challenge is mainly on the ground that unguided powers
have been given to the Insurer to engage any other person, who may
not be even having knowledge to determine the loss. In view of the
above, challenge to the provision has been made as it is hit by Articles
14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of The Constitution.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for
assessment of the claim, an approved surveyor or loss assessor needs
to be employed for proper assessment of loss. Sub-Section (8) of
Section 64UM has given unbridled and unguided power to the Insurer
to engage "any other person". It may be a minor or person not
acquainted with the subject and thereby, the prayer is made to strike
down the provisions of Section 64UM(8) to the extent aforesaid.
6. The contest to the writ petition has been made by the side
opposite.
7. Mr.R.Sankaranarayan, learned Additional Solicitor General
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.9972 of 2021
appearing for the first respondent submits that Sub-Section (8) of
Section 64UM does not provide unguided power to the Insurer to
employ any other person other than an approved surveyor or loss
assessor. Any other person can be employed only when the claim is
less than the amount specified in Sub-Section (4) in value on any
policy of the Insurer and when it is not practicable for any Insurer to
employ an approved surveyor or loss assessor without incurring
expenses disproportionate to the amount of claim. The Insurer has
been permitted in such case to employ any other person not
disqualified for the time being for being employed as a surveyor or loss
assessor for surveying the loss. Any other person can be only one who
is not disqualified to be a surveyor or loss assessor. Thus, it is not
appropriate to illustrate that while exercising the power under Section
64UM(8), the Insurer can engage even a minor or any other person
despite disqualified to be a surveyor.
8. A reference of Section 42D of the Act of 1938 has been given
to refer to the disqualification. For engaging any other person while
invoking Section 64UM(8), the person should not incur disqualification
given under Section 42D of the Act and hence, the powers are neither
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.9972 of 2021
unbridled nor unguided.
9. Section 64UM(8) of the Act of 1938 was given interpretation
by the Delhi High Court in the case of Surveyors Welfare
Association (Regd.) Vs. Union of India & Others [ILR 1996 (2)
Delhi 22]. It was in reference to unamended provision of Section
64UM(6), which is now Section 64UM(8) after the amendment. The
challenge to the policy decision was made in regard to engagement of
any other person for survey of the loss other than the approved
surveyor or loss assessor.
10. The provision aforesaid would apply when claim is less than
the amount specified in Sub-Section (4) of Section 64UM and is not
found practicable to employ approved surveyor or loss assessor
without incurring expenses disproportionate to the amount of claim,
any other person can be engaged. The provisions of Sub-Section (8)
apply only to the claims, which are of a value of less than the amount
specified in Sub-Section (4) and that too, when the Insurer finds it to
be not practicable to employ an approved surveyor or loss assessor
without incurring expenses disproportionate to the amount of claim. It
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.9972 of 2021
is to save the claimants from incurring expenses disproportionate to
the claim.
11. The provision aforesaid was made in public interest and for
the reasons and in the situation when expenses to be incurred towards
approved surveyor or loss assessor is found to be disproportionate to
the amount of claim. An illustration was given specifying that in a
given case, the claim is for a sum of Rs.10,000/- and to survey the
loss, the fee of the approved surveyor or loss assessor comes to
Rs.5,000/-, then, expenses on engagement of approved surveyor
become disproportionate to the claim and in that eventuality, the
engagement of any other person would be appropriate. It is also that
such person should not be one disqualified for time being to be
employed as surveyor or loss assessor.
12. The learned Additional Solicitor General has given a further
reference to the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of
India (Insurance Surveyors and Loss Assessors) Regulations, 2015 (for
brevity, the Regulations, 2015). The amount of value of loss, for
which, any other person can be engaged, is now provided under
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.9972 of 2021
Regulation 12 after amendment under Section 64UM. A reference of
the amount specified under Regulation 12 of the Regulations 2015 has
also been given. The amount is specified every three years. In view of
the aforesaid, the prayer is to dismiss the writ petition.
13. We have carefully considered the rival submissions of the
parties and perused the records.
14. Section 64UM(8) has been reproduced in the preceding
paragraph. The challenge is precisely on the ground that Insurer has
been given unguided and unbridled power to engage any other person
other than the approved surveyor or loss assessor, for survey of the
claim of less than the amount specified under Sub-Section (4) and it is
now provided under Regulation 12 of the Regulations 2015. Emphasis
is on the engagement of approved surveyor or loss assessor for survey
of all the claims irrespective of the amount of loss and fee for survey.
15. Sub-Section (8) of Section 64UM is made applicable when it
is not practicable for the Insurer to employ an approved surveyor or
loss assessor without incurring expenses disproportionate to the
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.9972 of 2021
amount of claim. It is also when the claim is of an amount less than
the specified under Sub-Section (4) read with under Regulation 12 of
the Regulations 2015. The provision aforesaid is to save the claimants
from incurring expenses disproportionate to the claim.
16. Apart from the aforesaid, the engagement of any other
person is not unguided. The provision does not permit engagement of
a person disqualified for the time being to be employed as a surveyor
or loss assessor. In view of the above, any other person would be such
a person, not disqualified for being a surveyor or loss assessor. The
argument that unguided powers have been given to the Insurer for
engagement of any other person cannot be accepted.
17. The disqualification for registration of intermediary or
insurance intermediary is given under Section 42D of the Act of 1938,
which is quoted hereunder for ready reference. :
"42D. (1) The Authority or an officer authorized
by it in this behalf shall, in the manner determined by
the regulations made by the Authority and on payment
of the fees determined by the regulations made by the
Authority, issue to any person making an application in
the manner determined by the regulations, and not
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.9972 of 2021
suffering from any of the disqualifications herein
mentioned, a licence to act as an intermediary or an
insurance intermediary under this Act:
Provided that,-
(a) in the case of an individual, he does not
suffer from any of the disqualifications mentioned in
sub-section (4) of section 42, or
(b) in the case of a company or firm, any of its
directors or partners does not suffer from any of the
said disqualifications.
(2) A licence issued under this section shall
entitle the holder thereof to act as an intermediary or
insurance intermediary.
(3) A licence issued under this section shall
remain in force for a period of three years only from the
date of issue, but shall, if the applicant, being an
individual does not, or being a company or firm any of
its directors or partners does not suffer from any of the
disqualifications mentioned in clauses (b), (c), (d), (e)
and (f) of sub-section (4) of section 42 and the
application for renewal of licence reaches the issuing
authority at least thirty days before the date on which
the licence ceases to remain in force, be renewed for a
period of three years at any one time on payment of the
fee, determined by the regulations made by the
Authority and additional fee for an amount determined
by the regulations, not exceeding one hundred rupees
by way of penalty, if the application for renewal of the
licence does not reach the issuing authority at least
thirty days before the date on which the licence ceases
to remain in force.
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.9972 of 2021
(4) No application for the renewal of a licence
under this section shall be entertained if the application
does not reach the issuing authority before the licence
ceases to remain in force:
Provided that the Authority may, if satisfied
that undue hardship would be caused otherwise, accept
any application in contravention of this sub-section on
payment by the application of the penalty of seven
hundred and fifty rupees.
(5) The disqualifications above referred to shall
be the following: -
(a) that the person is a minor;
(b) that he is found to be a unsound mind by a
court of competent jurisdiction;
(c) that he has been found guilty of criminal
misappropriation or criminal breach of trust or cheating
or forgery or an abetment of or attempt to commit any
such offence by a court of competent jurisdiction:
Provided that, where at least five years have
elapsed since the completion of the sentence
imposed on any person in respect of any such offence,
the Authority shall ordinarily declare in respect of such
person that his conviction shall cease to operate as a
disqualification under this clause;
(d) that in the course of any judicial
proceedings relating to any policy of insurance of the
winding up of an insurance company or in the course of
an investigation of the affairs of an insurer it has been
found that he has been guilty of or has knowingly
participated in or connived at any fraud dishonestly or
misrepresentation against an insurer or an insured;
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.9972 of 2021
(e) that he does not possess the requisite
qualifications and practical training for a period not
exceeding twelve months, as may be specified by the
regulations made by the Authority in this behalf;
(f) that he has not passed such examinations
as may be specified by the regulations made by the
Authority in this behalf;
(g) that he violates the code of conduct as may
be specified by the regulations made by the Authority.
(6) If it be found that an intermediary or an
insurance intermediary suffers from any of the foregoing
disqualifications, without prejudice to any other penalty
to which he may be liable, the Authority shall, and if the
intermediary or an insurance intermediary has
knowingly contravened any provisions of this Act may
cancel the licence issued to the intermediary or
insurance intermediary under this section.
(7) The Authority may issue a duplicate licence
to replace a licence lost, destroyed or mutilated, on
payment of such fee, as may be determined by the
regulations made by the Authority.
(8) Any person who acts as an intermediary or
an insurance intermediary without holding a licence
issued under this section to act as such, shall be
punishable with fine, and any insurer or any person who
appoints as an intermediary or an insurance
intermediary or any person not licensed to act as such
or transacts any insurance business in India through
any such person, shall be punishable with fine.
(9) Where the person contravening sub-section
(8) is a company or a firm, then, without prejudice to
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.9972 of 2021
any other proceedings which may be taken against the
company or firm, every director, manager, secretary or
other officer of the company, and every partner of the
firm who is knowingly a party to such contravention
shall be punishable with fine."
18. The provision aforesaid was ignored by the petitioner while
making challenge to the provision for engagement of any other person
for survey of loss in a given situation. Any other person should be one
not disqualified to be a surveyor. This power is not unguided, rather
governed by Sub-Section (4) of Section 64UM and Section 42D of the
Act.
19. Section 64UM(8) is to provide safeguard to the claims if the
value of the claim is less than the amount provided under Regulation
12 of the Regulations 2015. It is for the reason that the approved
surveyor or loss assessor is entitled to claim fee, as specified. The fee
payable to them may remain disproportionate to the claim in the given
case and in that case, the Insurer has been given liberty to engage
any other person for survey of claim, who is not disqualified for being
an approved surveyor. Accordingly, we find that the only ground taken
by the petitioner for challenge to Section 64UM(8) is not made out.
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.9972 of 2021
The intent of Legislature is to provide safeguards to the claimant.
20. The learned Additional Solicitor General has cited the
judgment of the Delhi High Court in the case of Surveyors Welfare
Association (Regd.) (supra) where the challenge was made to the
policy of the Insurance Company not to employ approved surveyor or
loss assessor for small claims and the appeal was ultimately dismissed.
Paragraph 19 of the judgment is quoted hereunder for ready
reference:
"Now the question arises for our consideration in
respect of which a controversy is being raised is with
regard to the true meaning of the word "not being a
person disqualified". The learned Single Judge has held
that if a person does not fulfill the requisite
qualifications in clause (a) to (g) of Sub-Section 1(D) of
Section 64UM, he is to be considered a person
disqualified for being employed as surveyor or loss
assessor. We, however, feel that the aforesaid
conclusion arrived at by the learned Single Judge appear
to us to be not correct and we express our pain for not
being able to agree with him on this count. In our
opinion, the word 'disqualified' does not mean not being
qualified. We also feel that while interpreting the
provisions of a statute the plain meaning of the words or
the expressions should be given effect to and in case the
said word or expression is found to be already defined in
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.9972 of 2021
the Act itself, then the said definition as enumerated in
the Act itself should be held to be the guiding principle
for giving true meaning to the expression. As we have
staled earlier Sub-Section (4) of Section 42 of the Act
clearly lays down the criteria and/or grounds on which a
person is said to be disqualified. In our opinion, while
interpreting the provisions of Sub-Section (6) of section
64UM, the expression "any other person not being a
person dis-qualified for the time being" should be given
the same meaning as is given to the said expression
appearing in Section 42(4) and nothing beyond it and
thereby qualifying a person not suffering from any of the
disqualifications' occurring in Sub-Section (1) of Section
42 and enumerated in Sub-Section (4) of Section 42 of
the Act."
21. Another judgment cited by the learned Additional Solicitor
General is in the case of R.K.Elango Vs. Insurance Regulatory and
Development Authority (IRDA) [W.P.(MD).No.9681 of 2018
decided by judgment dated 27.2.2019] wherein challenge to the
Constitutional validity was not made, but issue raised before this Court
had been discussed holding the provision neither arbitrary nor violative
of Article 14 of The Constitution of India.
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.9972 of 2021
22. In view of the above, we do not find the provision under
challenge to be unconstitutional. It does not hit Articles 14, 19(1)(g)
and 21 of The Constitution of India.
23. Accordingly, the writ petition fails and is dismissed.
Consequently, the connected WMPs are also dismissed. There will be
no order as to costs.
(M.N.B., ACJ.) (P.D.A., J.)
24.11.2021
Index : Yes/No
To:
1.Government of India
Ministry of Finance Rep. by its Secretary
North Block New Celhi 110001.
2.Insurance Regulatory and Development
Authority (IRDA) Rep. by its
Chairman, Parishram Bhavan,
3rd Floor, Basheer Bagh, Hyderabad 500004.
RS
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.9972 of 2021
M.N.BHANDARI, ACJ
AND
P.D.AUDIKESAVALU,J.
RS
W.P.No.9972 of 2021 & WMP.
Nos.10597 & 10604 of 2021
24.11.2021
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
