Report No. 13
55. Section 28.-
Decided cases reveal1 a divergence of opinion in relation to certain classes of insurance policies with reference to the applicability of this section. On examination, it would appear that these cases do not really turn on the interpretation of the section but hinge on the construction of the insurance policies in question. The principle itself is well recognised that an agreement providing for the relinquishment of rights and remedies is valid but an agreement for relinquishment of remedies only falls within the mischief of section 28. Thus, in our opinion, no change is called for by reason of the aforesaid conflict of judicial authority.
1. Hirabhai v. Narotama Das v. Manufacturer's Life Insurance Co., 16 IC 1001. cf. Baroda Spinning and Weaving Co. Ltd v. Satyanarayana, 38 Bom 344 (348, 349).
The Government of Bihar has suggested that Exception 1 be widened by substituting the words 'the parties will be bound by the award' in place of 'only the amount awarded in such arbitration shall be recoverable'. We feel that there is good reason in support of this suggestion and we recommend accordingly.
56. Section 29.- No change is necessary in section 29.
Back
