SHRI BINOD KUMAR SINGHversusNATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.

                 [2025] 2 S.C.R. 521 : 2025 INSC 154

                      Shri Binod Kumar Singh
                                  v.
                  National Insurance Company Ltd.
                       (Civil Appeal No. 2214 of 2025)
                              07 February 2025
       [B.V. Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma,* JJ.]


                           Issue for Consideration
       Issue arose as regards the order of the National Consumer
       Disputes Redressal Commission disallowing the insurance claim
       of the appellant.

                                  Headnotes†
       Insurance – Insurance claim – Entitlement – Valid National
       permit – Non-depositing of authorization fee – Truck of the
       appellant, insured with the respondent-insurance company,
       caught fire during the insurance period – Direction by the
       State Commission to the respondent to settle the claim on
       non-standard basis – However, the National Commission held
       that the insurance claim cannot be allowed in the absence of
       any valid permit and set aside the order passed by the State
       Commission – Correctness:
       Held: National permit was valid – Authorization fee was required
       to be paid only when the truck was moving out of State of Bihar as
       it was registered in the State of Bihar and the truck caught fire in
       the State of Bihar itself, thus, the respondent company could not
       have repudiated the claim on such a frivolous ground – Permit was
       issued by the competent authority in Bihar, thus, no requirement
       of paying authorization fee when the truck was being used in the
       State of Bihar – As per the terms and conditions of the National
       Permit, authorization fee was required to be paid only when the
       truck was moving out of State of Bihar – Thus, the apellant entitled
       for the insurance claim as held by the State Commission – Order
       passed by the National Commission set aside – Appellant not only
       entitled for the entire claim amount right from the date it became
       due but also entitled for interest @ 9% per annum from the date


* Author
522                                                                 [2025] 2 S.C.R.

                         Digital Supreme Court Reports


       of the complaint made before State Commission till the date, the
       amount is actually paid to him. [Paras 8, 9]

                                  Case Law Cited
       National Insurance Company v. Nitin Khandelwal, Criminal Appeal
       No. 8463/2014; Amrit Paul Singh and Anr. v. TATA AIG General
       Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors. (2018) 7 SCC 558 – referred to.

                                    List of Acts
       Insurance; Authorization fee; Validity of insurance cover;
       Non-standard basis; National permit; State Consumer Disputes
       Redressal Commission; National Consumer Disputes Redressal
       Commission; Insurance claim; Valid National permit; Non-depositing
       of authorization fee; Insurance period; Non-standard basis; Absence
       of valid permit; Repudiation of claim; Interest.

                                 List of Keywords
       Compounding of offence; Compounding application; First offence;
       Actual date of filing of return of income; Due date for filing of returns;
       Subsequent furnishing of return of income by assessee; Failure
       to furnish returns of income; “Voluntary disclosure”; Guidelines
       for Compounding of Offences under Direct Tax Laws, 2014;
       Guidelines for Compounding of Offences under Direct Tax Laws,
       2008; Guidelines for Compounding of Offences under Direct Tax
       Laws, 2019; Guidelines for Compounding of Offences under Direct
       Tax Laws, 2022; Delay in filing return.

                                Case Arising From
       CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 2214 of 2025
       From the Judgment and Order dated 19.08.2020 of the National
       Consumers Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi in FA
       No. 1778 of 2017

                             Appearances for Parties
       Neeraj Shekhar, Mrs. Kshama Sharma, Rajesh Maurya, Ram
       Bachhan Choudhary, Amrendra Singh, Ms. Priya Chakraborty,
       Ujjwal Ashutosh, Advs. for the Appellant.
       Amit Kumar Singh, Ms. K Enatoli Sema, Ms. Chubalemla Chang,
       Prang Newmai, Advs. for the Respondent.
[2025] 2 S.C.R.                                                         523

     Shri Binod Kumar Singh v. National Insurance Company Ltd.


                Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court

                                Judgment

     Satish Chandra Sharma, J.

1.   Leave Granted.
2.   The present appeal is arising out of order dated 19.08.2020 passed
     by National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi,
     (for short, “the National Commission”) in First Appeal No. 1778 of
     2017.
3.   The facts of the case reveal that the appellant before this Court is the
     owner of Truck bearing registration No. BR-02-Q9220 make TATA-
     251625.0LPKTC. The truck was insured with the respondent National
     Insurance Company for a period of one year i.e. from 18.09.2013 to
     the midnight of 17.09.2014 and unfortunately, the truck caught fire
     on account of short-circuit on 08.06.2014 meaning thereby during
     the validity of insurance cover.
4.   The appellant preferred a complaint before the State Consumer
     Disputes Redressal Commission, Bihar, Patna (for short, “the State
     Commission”) and the State Commission placing reliance on the
     judgment delivered in the case of National Insurance Company
     Vs. Nitin Khandelwal (Criminal Appeal No. 8463/2014) directed the
     respondent insurance company to settle the claim on non-standard
     basis within a period of three months if other requirements were
     fulfilled by the appellant.
5.   The respondent National Insurance Company being aggrieved by the
     order passed by the State Commission dated 07.07.2017 preferred an
     appeal before the National Commission and the National Commission
     has allowed the appeal holding that the judgment delivered by this
     Court in the case of Nitin Khandelwal (supra) does not help the
     appellant as it was a theft case whereas the present case relates
     to damage by fire. The National Commission after placing reliance
     upon the judgment delivered in the case of Amrit Paul Singh and
     Anr. Vs. TATA AIG General Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors. (2018) 7
     SCC 558 has allowed the appeal and held that the insurance claim
     cannot be allowed in the absence of any valid permit thereby setting
     aside the order passed by the State Commission.
524                                                           [2025] 2 S.C.R.

                       Digital Supreme Court Reports


6.     Learned counsel for the appellant has vehemently argued before this
       Court that the All India Permit (National Permit) was issued having
       validity period with effect from 14.10.2012 to 13.10.2017 and for
       State of Bihar, the permit was in force from 13.10.2012 to 13.10.2013
       meaning thereby, on the date the truck caught fire on 08.06.2014,
       there was a valid National Permit in existence.
7.     Learned counsel for the respondent National Insurance Company
       has vehemently argued before this Court that as per the terms and
       conditions of the permit, the fee was deposited for a period with effect
       from 13.10.2012 to 13.10.2017 and the authorization fee was not
       deposited beyond 14.10.2013 and, therefore, and in the absence of
       non-depositing of authorization fee, National Permit cannot be said
       to be a valid permit.
8.     This Court has carefully gone through the permit which is on record
       and the National Permit is certainly valid up to 13.10.2017. The
       authorization fee was required to be paid only when the truck was
       moving out of State of Bihar as it was registered in the State of Bihar
       and the truck caught fire on account of short-circuit on 08.06.2014
       in the State of Bihar itself and, therefore, the respondent company
       could not have repudiated the claim on such a frivolous ground. The
       permit in question was issued by the competent authority in Bihar and,
       therefore, there was no requirement of paying authorization fee when
       the truck was being used in the State of Bihar and as per the terms
       and conditions of the National Permit, authorization fee was required
       to be paid only when the truck was moving out of State of Bihar. Thus,
       in the considered opinion of this Court, the appellant was certainly
       entitled for the insurance claim as held by the State Commission
       and, therefore, the order passed by the National Commission, dated
       19.08.2020, deserves to be set aside and is accordingly set aside.
       The respondent National Insurance Company is directed to process
       the claim of the appellant and to pay the amount to the appellant
       within a period of 60 days from today. It is needless to mention that
       the claim became due in the year 2014 and it was repudiated by
       the respondent National Insurance Company in the year 2014 itself.
       The order of the State Commission allowing the claim was passed
       in the year 2017 which was reversed by the National Commission
       in the year 2020. Therefore, in the considered opinion of this Court,
       the appellant was not only entitled for the entire claim amount right
       from the date it became due but he is also entitled for interest from
[2025] 2 S.C.R.                                                       525

     Shri Binod Kumar Singh v. National Insurance Company Ltd.


     the date of the complaint made before State Commission till the date,
     the amount is actually paid to him. The appellant shall be entitled to
     interest @ 9% per annum and the same with the proposed amount
     be paid positively within 60 days from today.
9.   With the aforesaid, the appeal stands allowed. No orders as to costs.
     Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.

     Result of the case: Appeal allowed.



     †
         Headnotes prepared by: Nidhi Jain