Insurance taken in dead person's name nullity: Consumer forum

A consumer forum here has rejected a woman's insurance claim for a stolen car, which was insured in her deceased husband's name, saying cover taken in the name of a dead person is a nullity.
The North Delhi District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, presided by Babu Lal, rejected the claim of Saraswati, whose husband had taken the car on loan and after his death in February 2011, she allegedly got policy renewed in his name.
While turning down the claim, the forum noted that after her husband's death, neither Saraswati took any step to get the vehicle registration transferred in her name, nor did she take any step to get earlier policy transferred in her own name.

"There is no estoppel against the law. If insurance was taken in name of dead person, it is a nullity," the forum said.
The forum also noted that Saraswati informed the insurer about theft after 18 days which was inordinate delay.
"... We hold that firstly complainant has no insurable interest in policy and secondly, complainant gave intimation about theft of the vehicle after 18 days.

"Inordinate delay in breach of policy is valid ground for repudiation of claim, it cannot be said that claim has wrongly been repudiated. Complaint is accordingly dismissed," it said.
Saraswati had submitted before forum that her husband had purchased a car on loan in 2008 and he died on February 3, 2011.

After that she informed the firm's agent about death of her husband as well as the loan due to the bank on the car as the insurance was about to expire in May 2011.
The agent assured her that the car can be insured even after the death of her husband as the insurance pertained to the car and not of her husband.
Later, the agent contacted her and she agreed for insurance in the name of her late husband and paid the premium of Rs 4,625 and insurance policy was issued by the firm in favour of her late husband.

However, the car was stolen on April 28, 2012 and an FIR was lodged and intimation was given to the firm.
The complainant lodged the claim with the firm but it did not sanction the claim on the ground of delay of 18 days in filing the complaint.
Thereafter, she approached the forum seeking a direction to the firm to pay the insurance amount, apart from cost and compensation.
The firm, denying the claim said that the policy was void and there cannot be a valid claim under a void agreement.