Report No. 185
Section 15 deals with relevancy of 'facts bearing on question whether act was accidental or intentional'. There are three illustrations below the section.
The purport of this section is well illustrated by illustration (a) which refers to a series of earlier acts of the same person which resulted in a fire accident as a result of which insurance was claimed. In a later incident, the fact that in the earlier incident the same person was involved, may be relevant in pointing out whether the fire was accidental or intentional. Sri Vepa P. Sarathi points out that the idea which is expressed in the illustration is not brought out clearly in the section, viz., that the 'same person' was involved in all the acts. In order to bring about this idea we agree with the suggestion of Sri Vepa P. Sarathi and recommend that section 15 should be recast as follows:
"15. Facts bearing on question whether act was accidental or intentional.- When there is a question whether an act of a person was accidental or intentional, or was done by a person with a particular knowledge or intention, the fact that such act formed part of a series of similar occurrences, in each of which the same person doing the act was concerned, is relevant."
We agree with the recommendation of Sri Vepa P. Sarathi and we recommend accordingly.
We accordingly differ from para 8.187 of the 69th Report which said that no amendment is necessary in section 15.