VIKRAM GREENTECH (I) LTD. & ANR. versus NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.

Citation: [2009] 5 S.C.R. 437 · Decided: 01-04-2009 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: D.K. JAIN · Disposal: Dismissed
Cited by 4 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

-
[2009) 5 S.C.R. 437 
) 
VIKRAM GREENTECH (I) LTD. & ANR. 
A 
v. 
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. 
(Civil Appeal No. 2080 of 2002) 
~---
APRIL 1, 2009 
' 
B 
' 
[D.K. JAIN AND R.M. LODHA, JJ.] 
Contract - Contract of insurance - Essentials of -
Discussed - Terms of insurance policy to be strictly construed 
- Insured cannot claim anything more than what is covered c 
by the insurance policy - Strict construction. 
,,. 
Insurance - Insurance policy - Construction of -
._. 
Reference to proposal form may not only be appropriate but 
rather essential - However, the surveyors' report cannot be 
D 
taken aid of nor can it furnish the basis for construction of a 
--
policy - Such outside aid for construction of insurance policy 
is 1.npermissible - On facts, the two document::. i.e. the 
insurance policy and the proposal form made it clear that the 
comprehensive f/oriculture insurance policy in question 
E 
covered poly-houses 1-6 which were in existence on the date 
of issuance of the policy and not poly-houses 7, BA and BB 
which though in existence at the time of the calamity were not 
• 
in existence on the date of issuance of the policy - Deeds 
and Documents - Commercial document. 
F 
Appellant No.1-company, incorporated with the 
object of setting up a floriculture project in the State of 
... 
Maharashtra, took a comprehensive floriculture 
insurance policy from respondent-insurance company in 
respect of poly-houses, irrigation system, cost of G 
cultivation of flowers and input cost from first flowering 
to the harvest. Severe storms/cyclones caused extensive 
damage to the poly-houses. For the loss suffered, 
appellant no.1 submitted claim with respondent-
437 
H 
438 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(2009] 5 S.C.R. 
A insurance company and thereafter approached the 
National Consumer Commission alleging deficiency of 
service by respondent-insurance company in not settling 
the claim. 
8 
Respondent-insurance company admitted that the 
policy covered poly-houses nos. 1 to 6 but pleaded that 
the claim on account of damages to poly-houses 7, SA 
and 88 was not admissible as these poly-houses were 
not covered under the policy. 
C 
The National Commission arrived at a finding that at 
the time of taking policy only six poly-houses were in 
existence and that there was no evidence or proof to 
substantiate that the insurance was also covered for 
poly- houses 7, SA and S8 and consequently held that 
D appellant no.1 was entitled to claim on account of 
damages to poly-houses nos.1-6 only. 
In appeal to this Court, the question which arose for 
consideration was whether the comprehensive 
E floriculture insurance policy issued by respondent-
insurance company covered poly-houses 7, SA and 88. 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
HELD:1. An insurance contract, is a species of 
F commercial transactions and must be construed like any 
other contract to its own terms and by itself. In a contract 
of insurance, there is requirement of uberimma fides i.e. 
good faith on the part of the insured. Except that, in other 
respects, there is no difference between a contract of 
G insurance and any other contract. The four essentials of 
a contract of insurance are, (i) the definition of the risk, 
(ii) the duration of the risk, (iii) the premium and (iv) the 
amount of insurance. Since upon issuance of insurance 
policy, the insurer undertakes to indemnify the loss 
H suffered by the insured on account of risks covered by 
-
. 
~ 
VIKRAM GREENTECH (I) LTD. & ANR. v. NEW INDIA 
439 
ASSURANCE CO. LTD. 
,.. 
the insurance policy, its terms have to be strictly A 
construed to determine the extent of liability of the 
insurer. The endeavour of the court must always be to 
interpret the words in which the contract is expressed by 
/ 
~ 
the parties. The court while construing the terms of policy 
is not expected to venture into extra liberalism that may B 
1 
result in re-writing the contract or substituting the terms 
which were not intended by the parties. The insured 
t 
cannot claim anything more than what is covered by the 
• 
insurance policy. [Para 15] [444-0-G] 
.. 
c 
-< 
General Assurance Society Ltd. v. Chandumul/ Jain and 
_., 
another AIR 1966 SC 1644; Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. 
.. 
Sony Cheriyan (1999) 6 SCC 451 and United India Insurance 
-" 
Co. Ltd. v. Harchand Rai Chandan Lal (2004) S SCC 644, 
relied on. 
D 
2. Document like proposal form is a commercial 
.. 
document and being an integral part of policy, reference 
to
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.