As to the first two contentions, they were urged v. T/11 Union oj4 India

As to the first two contentions, they were urged in Petitions Nos. 94 of 1954 and 183 of 1954 but were to be put forward by this Court as these not allowed in the peti questions had not been specifically raised tions under article 32 of the Constitution and is simila~ were accordingly dismissed. The position in this respect so far as the present applications are concerned and consequently it must be held that the be allowed now to urge grounds cannot . petitioners which they had not taken in their petitions. 66 1955 The Tropical Insurana Co. IJd. and others v. T/11 Union oj4 India and another Imam]. 520 SUPREME COURT REPORTS L1955J business. insurance to consider He contends the petitioners. the petitioners the last con There remains, however, It was tention urged on behalf of pointed out by Mr. Isaacs that are in insurance business surance companies doing both and general section 52-A of the Act, on a true interpretation of its provisions, applies only to the life insurance business carried on by an insurer and not to the general insu by him. The Administrator ap rance business done pointed under section 52-A Gf the Act could therefore take over management only of the life insurance busi ness done by the insurer. The notifications authoris ing him to take over the management of the insurance business of the insurer including his general insurance the powers conferred on business were Government under section 52-A of the Act and such the management of the general insu taking over of rance business of the petitioners by the Administrator was, therefore, without lawful authority. thus beyond In view of the submission made by the learned Coun it is necessary relevant provisions that section sel, of the section 52-A. Sub-section states:- to set out the (1) of "If at is acting the Controller has reason to be any time lieve that an insurer carrying· on life insurance busi in a manner likely to be prejudicial to the interests of holders of life insurance policies, he to the insurer to may, after giving such opportunity be heard as he thinks thereon to the Central Government". Sub-section (2) states:- fit, make a report an Administrator "The Central Government, if it is of opinion after it is necessary or proper considering the report to manage to do so, may appoint the affairs of the insurer under the direction and con trol of the Controller''. Sub-section ( 4) states :- "The management shall as on and after Administrator shall not issue any further policies". the insurer the date of appointment of the in such Administrator, but except the Administrator the Controller the business of the leave 1955 TlllTropieal 11u.,_ Co. Ltd. 11114 al/urs v. Thi Ullin of India """ •. ,,.., 1-J. 2S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 521 file with of the Administrator. Under is concerned with the powers Section 52-B of the Act and duties this section, the management of the Administrator shall conduct the business of the insurer with the greatest economy compatible with efficiency and shall, as soon as may the Controller a report stating be possible, what specified courses unde:r the section should be taken which would general interest of the holders of life policies. One of the courses specified is the winding up of the business Section 52-D of the Act is concerned the appointment of the Adminis is concerned with the trator. Section 53 of the Act winding up by the Controller up of an insurance, to apply to the Court for winding company on certain grounds, one of the continuance of the company would be prejudicial to the interests of the policy-holders· the Court and it enable be most advantageous termination of them being the insurer. Mr. "life reference the Act with insurance business". that while keeping insurance business" and "life Isaacs urged that the Act made a clear distinc tion between insurance business and general insur ance business of an insurer. He referred to various to Registration, sections of Separation of Accounts and Funds and Balance-Sheets. It was also pointed out by him that the Act defines "general insurance busi and these two kinds of businesses are quite dis ness" tinct. There could be little doubt that the Act does insurance business" as something distinct regard from "general It seems to us. this distinction in mind, however, in section 52-A(l) we have to give their ordinary and natural meaning. "Insurer" has the Act. The definition been defined speaks of an insurer cc.rrying on an insurance busi ness. This business may be either a insurance business or a general insurance business or both. Under section 7 of the Act deposits have to be made by every sub-clause ( c) of clause (9) of section 2. The section specifies µie amount of deposit to be made where the business done specifies the deposit to be made in the case of business. 15-93 S.C. India/59 insurance only. to the words used insurer specified in section 2 of insurer other Similarly than an 1955 Tht Tropical Iruurance Co. [Jr!. and others v. The Union of Ilfdia and ,,,.,,,,,,. 1-1. 522 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1955] the holders of the report, may is does it apply It also contemplates a The Central Government, done which comes within the description of general insurance business only. insurance business and general insur bination of life ance business and specifies the deposit to be made in such event. It is clear that section 52-A ( 1) does not apply to an insurer doing only general insurance busi ness. The question . for decision him when he also does along with such business insurance business? Section 52-A(l) speaks of "an It does insurer carrying on life insurance business". insurance business". not speak of "only It permissible for an insurer to combine in his insurance business both life and general insurance business. If is likely to be prejudicial he acts in a manner which insurance to the interests of policies with him, he makes himself amenable the Act and the Con provisions of the section 52-A of to the Central troller is authorised to make a report after con Government. appoint an Administrator to sidering the manage manage '.'the affairs" of th~ insurer and "the business" of the insurer shall vest in the ment of Administrator. and "the the insurer are wide enough to empower business" of the Central Government the manage take over the insurer including ment of the entire business of his general insurance business. To hold otherwise would be to give an unnatural meaning to the words used in section 52-A of the Act. In the present case companies and it is limited the Act intended to vest in difficult to conceive the Administrator insurance business while the insurers would be free manage the general insurance business, because under section 52-B the company after Controller managing efficiently. Under section 53 a Court may order a winding up of an insurance company if on an appli that the con cation by to the interests tinuance of the company is prejudicial the com-. of the policy-holders. The winding up of the winding up of insurance busines.s economically insurers are public the Administrator may suggest to the Controller, it is satisfied the management of only "the affairs" The words 1955 Tiu Tropical Insurance Co. !Jd. and olhtrs v. Tiu Union of India and anothtr /11111m]. 2S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 523 in which its entire is carried been to safeguard insurance pany would be concerned with including insurance business, business life and general there could be no partial winding up of a because It is not difficult to imagine that the affairs company. to its general insurance of the company with reference business may be in such a hopeless state that winding up may be the only course to protect the to be taken the life . policy-holders. When the provi interests of sions of the Act are closely examined, it will be noticed that its main policy has the inte rests of life policy-holders, who are deeply affected by the manner the insurance business of an on. We have no difficulty in inter insurer preting section 52-A(l) to mean that where an insurer is carrying on business of various kinds insurance business, he becomes the provisions of section 52-A if he is amenable acting holders of life policies and he would have to suffer the the report made by the Con following consequences the appointment of an Administrator by troller and in the Act making the Government. insurance business a distinction between general the keeping of separate :md balance-sheets have been enacted for the accounts safeguard of the holders of life insurance policies and they provide an over-all picture of the business done by the insurer showing the exact state of affairs con cerning !he life insurance business of the insurer. These provisions cannot and do not aflect the provisions of of section 52-A of the Act. The provisions business, in a manner prejudicial to the interests of includes insurance insurance These pet1t1ons are accordingly dismissed with costs to be paid by Petitioners 2, 3 and 4 in Petition No. 186 of 1954 and Petitioners 2 and 3 in Petition No. 195 of 1954.