Skip to main content

Ambiguity in policy and definition of 'Tail End Transit'

In Va Tech Wabag Limited vs Cholamandalam Ms. General, a container truck while carrying membranes from Chennai Port to Nemmeli met with an accident while in transit.  On intimation being given to the insurer, a surveyor was appointed to assess the loss to the complainant.  The surveyor assessed the loss at Rs.1.60 crores but the claim was rejected vide letter dated 19.4.2012.

The only question before NCDRC which arises for consideration in this complaint is as to whether goods were in tail end transit at the time the truck met with an accident and the goods were consequently damaged.  The term 'tail end transit' has not been defined anywhere in the insurance policy. In the ordinary parlance, the aforesaid term would mean the final phase of the journey. A term, which is not clearly defined and therefore is capable of the several interpretations depending upon the factual matrix, would be a vague term and the benefit of such a term would accrue to the insured.

Hon'ble Supreme Court in New India Assurance Company Limited Vs. Zuari Industries Ltd. & Others (2009) 9 SCC 70, where the Hon'ble Supreme Court referred to its previous decision in General Assurance Society Ltd. Vs. Chandmull Jain, AIR 1966 SC 1644 holding that in case of ambiguity in a contract of insurance, the ambiguity should be resolved in favour of the claimant and against the insurance company.  Reliance is also placed upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Pushpalaya Printers (2004) 3 SCC 694, where the Hon'ble Supreme Court reiterated that where the words of a documents are ambiguous they shall be construed against the party, which prepared the documents.

However, NCDRC decided that irrespective of the ambiguity of the policy document, if the journey of the goods involves multiple cities, the tail end transit would begin when the goods enter the final city in which their journey has to terminate. In the journey involving a single city, the tail end transit, in my opinion would be the destination point where the goods have to be unloaded.  In the present case, the goods were to be unloaded at Nemmeli site, which s stated to be a part of Chennai.  The accident happened just before the trailer carrying goods was to enter the Nemmeli site.  Since trailer had not actually entered Nemmeli site, the goods, in my opinion were not in the tail end transit at the time they got damaged.  Therefore, there was no requirement of the entering into a written agreement as to the rate and other terms, prior to commencement of the transit.


Comments

Most viewed this month

One Sided Clauses In Builder-Buyer Agreements Is An Unfair Trade Practice

In CIVIL APPEAL NO. 12238 OF 2018, Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd. vs Govindan Raghavan, an appeal was filed before the Supreme Court  by the builder against the order of the National Consumer Forum. The builder had relied upon various clauses of the Apartment Buyer’s Agreement to refute the claim of the respondent but was rejected by the commission which found the said clauses as wholly one-sided, unfair and unreasonable, and could not be relied upon. The Supreme Court on perusal of the Apartment Buyer’s Agreement found stark incongruities between the remedies available to both the parties. For example, Clause 6.4 (ii) of the Agreement entitles the Appellant – Builder to charge Interest @18% p.a. on account of any delay in payment of installments from the Respondent – Flat Purchaser. Clause 6.4 (iii) of the Agreement entitles the Appellant – Builder to cancel the allotment and terminate the Agreement, if any installment remains in arrears for more than 30 da...

Inherited property of childless hindu woman devolve onto heirs of her parents

In Tarabai Dagdu Nitanware vs Narayan Keru Nitanware, quashing an order passed by a joint civil judge junior division, Pune, the Bombay High Court has held that under Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act, any property inherited by a female Hindu from her father or mother, will devolve upon the heirs of her father/mother, if she dies without any children of her own, and not upon her husband. Justice Shalini Phansalkar Joshi was hearing a writ petition filed by relatives of one Sundarabai, who died issueless more than 45 years ago on June 18, 1962. Article referred:http://www.livelaw.in/property-inherited-female-hindu-parents-shall-devolve-upon-heirs-father-not-husband-dies-childless-bombay-hc-read-judgment/

Court approached in the early stages of arbitration will prevail in all other subsequent proceedings

In National Highway Authority of India v. Hindustan Steelworks Construction Limited, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court opined that once the parties have approached a certain court for relief under Act at earlier stages of disputes then it is same court that, parties must return to for all other subsequent proceedings. Language of Section 42 of Act is categorical and brooks no exception. In fact, the language used has the effect of jurisdiction of all courts since it states that once an application has been made in Part I of the Act then ―that Court alone shall have jurisdiction over arbitral proceedings and all subsequent applications arising out of that agreement and arbitral proceedings shall be made in that Court and in no other Court. Court holds that NHAI in present case cannot take advantage of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for explaining inordinate delay in filing present petition under Section 34 of this Act in this Court.