Case Details

Citation(s)
1959 SLG 4377 = 1959 SLD 4377 = 1959 PLD 275
WEST PAKISTAN, KARACHI
    Civil Suits No. 503, 557, 558 and 559 of 1954 and 154 of 1955, decided on 15th February 1959.
Presented By: Qadeeruddin Ahmed, J
  I. A. Lari for Plaintiff.   Fazlur Rahman and Irshad Ali for Defendant.

QUEENSLAND INSURANCE CO. LTD.-Plaintiff  

VERSUS

  THE PAKISTAN INTERNATIONAL AIRLINES -Defendant

Law: The Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882)

Section: 115-A(2)

Law: Contract Act (IX of 1872)

Section: 69

(a) Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882)   S. 1.I5-A (2) Subrogation-Insurer not entitled to benefit of, in case of insurance of goods carried by air in absence of assignment of right of action of insurant-Contract Act (IX of 1872), S. 69-Not in point.   Section 135-A of the Transfer of Property Act applies to marine insurance and may be applied to the insurance of carriage of goods by land in view of the definition of " Marine Insurance Business " contained in S. 2 (13-A) of the Insurance Act, but cannot be said to apply to carriage of goods by air.   If section 135-A of the Transfer of Property Act does not apply to contracts of insurance relating to carriage of goods by air then there is no statutory law to enable the insurer to sue for the recovery of damages as the substitute of the insured persons.   The insurers have, therefore, to make the best use of the doctrine of subrogation alone.   That doctrine, however, requires a formal assignment of the rights of action of the insurant.   In the absence of such an assignment, the insurer cannot sue for damages recoverable by the insurant from the air transport company.   Castellain v. Preston (1883) 11 Q B D 380 C A rel.   Queensland Insurance Company Limited v. British India Steam Navigation Company Limited P L D 1958 Kar. 389 ; Indian T. & G. 1. Company v. Union of India A I R 1957 Cal. 193 and Alliance Assurance Company Limited v. The Union of India, Civil Rule 3020 of 1955 mentioned as irrelevant.   Welford and Otter-Barry: "Law Relating to Fire Insurance".   Section 69 of the Contract Act, which is a general provision of the Contract Act is not relevant to the discussion on subroga tion because an insurer, for example who insures the transit of goods by air, land or sea, does not pay for the loss suffered by the insured person on the ground that he is interested in the payment of the money which the carrier was bound by law to pay, but to honour his own commitment only. His interest as a subrogee in the payment due from the carrier arises to the insured person after he fulfils his own obligation and therefore section 69 does not…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register