Skip to main content

Legal Capsule by Lex Counsel

 Insurance Contract with Exclusion Clause and Protection of Insured Consumer


Many of the insured consumers have faced situations where the insurance companies fail to honour their commitments under the insurance contracts on one or the other pretext especially of hidden exclusion clauses in the contracts. Much to the dismay of the insured consumer, the insurance companies walk away from their obligations, basis these exclusion clauses in the insurance contracts. But this may hopefully change in the future owning to the recent Supreme Court’s judgment in the matter of Texco Marketing Pvt. Ltd. versus TATA AIG General Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors.1

Factual Background

Texco Marketing Pvt. Ltd. (“Appellant”) secured a Standard Fire & Special Perils Policy (“Policy”) for its shop from TATA AIG General Insurance Company Ltd. (“Respondent”) The shop was situated in the basement of a building. However, the exclusion clause of the insurance contract specified that the Policy did not cover the basement. Due inspection of the shop was made, which was situated on the other side of the road from the office of the Respondent. The Appellant continued to pay the premium.  Subsequently, the shop met with a fire accident. While making evaluation for sums payable, the surveyor of Respondent inspected the shop and did notice the fact that the earlier inspections were made and the fact that the shop was in a basement was to the knowledge of the insurer. Still the claim of the Appellant was repudiated by the Respondent seeking protection under the exclusion clause.

Before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (“SCDRC”), the contention of the Respondent was rejected and it was held that there was no adequate disclosure, and the insurer was deficient in service and indulged in unfair trade practice. In appeal, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (“NCDRC”) set aside the decision of SCDRC by placing reliance upon the exclusion clause, despite recording the finding that there was deficiency in service. The Appellant aggrieved by the decision of the NCDRC challenged the same before the Hon’ble Supreme Court (“SC”).


The Apex Court considered the issue as to whether an exclusion clause destroying the very contract knowingly entered, could be permitted to be used by a party who introduced it, received premiums and then used it to avoid its liability. The SC, while setting aside the order of NCDRC, analysed several key concepts, doctrines, and laws relevant to an insurance contract to uphold the rights of the insured and enforce the obligations of the insurance companies. Some of the key principles upheld by the SC are discussed below:

Adhesion Contract: The SC noted that the insurance contracts belong to a category of adhesion contracts i.e., these contracts are prepared by the insurer having a standard format in which the consumer has very little option or choice to negotiate the terms of the contract, except to sign on the dotted lines. The concept of freedom of contract loses some significance in a contract of insurance. Such contracts demand a very high degree of prudence, good faith, disclosure and notice on the part of the insurer. As premium is paid to address any contingency that might happen in future there is a legitimate expectation of reimbursement when an act of God happens. Therefore, an insurer is expected to keep that objective in mind, from the consumer’s point of view to cover the risk, as against a plausible repudiation.

Exclusion Clause: The SC emphasised that exception clauses must be interpreted to the benefit of the insured when the exception clauses are too wide and not consistent with the main purpose or object of the insurance policy, i.e., an exclusion clause must be understood on the prism of the main contract. Not only the onus but also the burden lies with the insurer when reliance is made on such a clause.

Duty of Disclosure, Good Faith and Notice: The SC emphasised on the doctrine of utmost good faith in the matters of insurance contracts starting from the time of execution of the contract. A disclosure should be a norm, especially so, as the insurer is statutorily mandated as per the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (Protection of Policy Holders’ Interests) Regulations, 2002 (“IRDA Regulations, 2002”) to provide all material information in respect of a policy to the insured to enable him to decide on the best cover. The SC held that non-compliance of the IRDA Regulations, 2002 preceded by unilateral inclusion, and thereafter followed by the execution of the contract, receiving benefits, and repudiation after knowing that it was entered into for a basement, would certainly be an act of unfair trade practice.

Indian Contract Act, 1872 (“ICA”): The SC noted that ICA debars a party deriving benefit from his wrongdoing and once a court of law is satisfied that a fraud, or misrepresentation resulted in the execution of the contract through the suppression of the existence of a mutually destructive clause facilitating the insurer to escape from the liability while drawing benefit from the consumer, the resultant relief will have to be granted.

Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (“CPA”): The SC noted that under the CPA, both SCDRC and NCDRC, have ample powers to declare “any terms of the contract” being unfair to any consumer to be null and void, if in its opinion, its introduction by the insurer has certain elements of unfairness. The consequence of the declaration of that term as unfair, would make the contract active and executable to the benefit of the consumer. Therefore, this provision takes care of a possible mischief by the insurer as against the consumer.


The Texco judgment has significant ramifications for the liability of insurance industry owing to its extensive interpretation of exclusion clauses in insurance contracts. Notably, the SC in its judgment has issued a ‘word of caution’ to all the insurance companies to comply with the provisions of the IRDA Regulations, 2002 which mandate fair and open disclosure of all material terms of the policy. Any non-compliance on the part of the insurance companies would take away their right to plead repudiation of contract by placing reliance upon any of the terms and conditions included thereunder.

The Texco judgment has given a fresh perspective to reading the exclusion clauses in the context of the insurance policy and bring much needed relief to the insured consumers. The SC has even extended the scope of the common law principle of acquiescence and estoppel to disallow insurers from taking advantage of their own wrong by using exclusion clause in ways repugnant to the main purpose of the contract.

Endnotes: -

[1] Civil Appeal No. 8249 of 2022 [Arising out of SLP (Civil) No. 25457 of 2019]) (2022 SCC OnLine SC 1546

If you have questions or would like additional information on the material covered herein, please contact:

Seema Jhingan, Partner

Jyoti Vats Mishra, Senior Associate

Disclaimer: LexCounsel provides this e-update on a complimentary basis solely for informational purposes. It is not intended to constitute, and should not be taken as legal advice, or a communication intended to solicit or establish any attorney-client relationship between LexCounsel and the reader(s). LexCounsel shall not have any obligations or liabilities towards any acts or omission of any reader(s) consequent to any information contained in this e-newsletter. The readers are advised to consult competent professionals in their own judgment before acting on the basis of any information provided hereby.

Popular posts from this blog

"Leveraged stock purchase led Arvind Rao to go astray": Forbes India

Forbes India has an article on the series of events leading to the recent controversial exit of Arvind Rao, Co-founder & CEO of listed Mobile VAS firm OnMobile. On November 23, 2010, Arvind Rao, the 53-year-old co-founder and CEO of OnMobile, bought approximately 6 lakh shares of his company from the open market, representing a little over 1 percent of the company’s total shares....At Rs 277 a share, he had to pony up nearly Rs 16.5 crore to acquire them....So he went ahead and borrowed money to buy the shares, thinking nothing of the interest it entailed or the fact that he’d need to put up nearly half his existing shareholding as collateral...OnMobile’s shares continued to fall from those levels, while Rao’s interest payments ballooned. ...Motivated by OnMobile’s growth all these years, he had never paid much attention to his salary, most of which went towards the monthly rental on his sea-facing apartment in Mumbai and his BMW 7-Series, both paid directly by the company. He req

VC Interview: Shailendra Singh of Sequoia Capital India

In a recent interview to Venture Intelligence, Shailendra Singh discussed some of the firm’s newer investments in the early stage segment including in the online payments space, the progress at a few existing portfolio companies and the active role the firm is playing in helping its portfolio companies scale and succeed in India and globally. Prior to joining the firm in 2006, Singh was a strategy consultant at Bain & Company in New York and before that, an entrepreneur in the digital media industry. Venture Intelligence: How does Sequoia go about identifying potential early stage investments in India? Is there anything different you are doing today than, say, a couple of years back? Shailendra Singh: There is a lot more focus on technology investing and early stage investing. In general, as you might remember a few years ago, we were doing primarily growth investing but in the past 18-odd months, we have had a very strong focus on early stage and that’s continuing. In terms

PE-VC investments fall 29% in 2022 to $46 Billion

Press Release: Private Equity - Venture Capital (PE-VC) firms investments in India fell by 29% in 2022 compared to the record highs of 2021. PE-VC firms invested $46 Billion (across 1,261 deals) in Indian companies in 2022, compared to $65 Billion (across 1,362 deals) in the previous year, reports  Venture Intelligence , a research service focused on private company financials, transactions, and their valuations. (Note: These figures include Venture Capital type investments, but exclude PE investments in Real Estate). India minted a total of 21 " Unicorn"  companies (VC-funded startups valued at $1 Billion or more) in 2022, 18 of them during the first six months of 2022 and less than half the 44 Unicorns minted in 2021. In fact, the final quarter of 2022 did not see any new unicorns being created. SaaS companies accounted for 29% of all the new unicorns in 2022,

Nasscom announces Short-listed Cos for EMERGE Product Showcase 2010

Software industry association Nasscom has released a shortlist of companies which will be showcased as part of the "EMERGE Product Showcase for 2010" at its Product Conclave 2010 event: Aikon Labs Pvt. Ltd. – A comprehensive idea and initiative management platform that utilizes Web 2.0 and social networking technologies integrated with process management, content management and analytics. The platform helps Enterprises & Academic/Research institutions in tapping ideas from stakeholders in their ecosystem and take them through a stage-gated process to execution. Elina Networks Pvt. Ltd. – Elina creates software based networking and IT management solutions that deliver business continuity and visibility, through robust network security, reliable connectivity, and effective remote IT management. Essentia Soft Solutions – Communities on the Cloud (community as a cloud service) Interviewstreet – Interviewstreet helps you to create your own customized programming tests (in

Blackstone, Temasek, Motilal Oswal and Stakeboat Capital win APEX'23 Private Equity Awards

Blackstone, Temasek, Motilall Oswal and Stakeboat Capital were awarded as among the leading Private Equity investors in India for 2022 as part of Venture Intelligence APEX‘23 Private Equity & Venture Capital awards event in Mumbai.  The Venture Intelligence “Awards for Private Equity Excellence” (APEX) is dedicated to celebrating the best that the Indian Private Equity & Venture Capital industry has to offer.  The APEX Awardees are selected based on both Self Nomination by the participating PE-VC firms as well as "crowd sourced" nominations and voting from the Limited Partner, PE-VC and advisory communities. (The main criteria are Exit Track Record, New Fund Raises & Follow-on Funding Rounds for Portfolio Companies) Temasek received the Private Equity Fund of the Year  2022 Award on the back of strong part exits during from  year from Intas Pharma (with an over 7.5x return); Devyani International (with ~4.8x) and Crompton Greaves Consumer Electricals (with ~3.5x).