Jurisdiction of Insurance Tribunal

2026 CLD 589 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

S.122Insurance claim under bank-introduced accidental coverCivil Court decree, execution ofConstitutional petitionAcceptance of execution, challenge toJurisdiction of Insurance TribunalScopePetitioner being a banking company and not an insurance companyEffectFailure to take objection viz. limitationEffectFailure to challenge decree in revisionEffect upon challenge to executionExecuting court cannot travel beyond the decreePrinciple

Briefly, respondent (widow) filed a suit seeking declaration and recovery of Rs.250,000/- (with 14% profit) against the petitioner bank under “UBL Aap Kay Tahafuz Saaiban” accidental cover for her deceased husband (account holder); bank accepted the policy but refused payment, alleging the claim was lodged beyond the 90-day period; Trial Court decreed the suit, petitioner bank's appeal was dismissed and no revision was filed; respondent/decree-holder filed execution which was accepted, leading to the institution of the present constitutional petition against execution orders

Held: It was for the first time that the petitioners had taken the plea that the present matter pertained to the insurance claim of the late husband of the respondent No.1 and fell within the exclusive domain of Insurance Tribunal constituted under Insurance Ordinance, 2000

Pleadings filed by the petitioners made it explicitly clear that no such ground was ever taken before Trial Court, Appellate Court and in the present petition

On the contrary, the claim of the respondent No. 1 was denied on the premise that same was time barred

The original judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court as well as Appellate Court were not challenged under the revision proceedings available to the petitioners in terms of S. 115, C.P.C., wherein such legal questions could have been appropriately examined and settled

Non-filing of the revision application against the original judgment and decree set at rest the entire controversy between the parties, as the judgments and decrees passed by the Courts below attained finality and became a closed and past transaction

The Executing Court could not examine the merits of the case; its sole function was to get the decree executed

The Executing Court as a settled principle of law could not go beyond the decree

Present petition apparently was filed to defeat the cause of justice and hamper the execution proceedings and to avoid the satisfaction of the decree

Moreover, Insurance Tribunal, as agitated by the petitioner, did not have jurisdiction in the matter since the petitioner was a banking company and not an insurance company

Findings of the courts below in execution proceedings did not suffer from any illegality or perversity requiring interference by the High Court under its supervisory and corrective jurisdiction

Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

2021 CLD 695 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Ss. 122, 115, 170 & 124Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 144 & O. VII R. 10Filing of insurance claim (application) before the Insurance Tribunal created under the Insurance Ordinance, 2000Jurisdiction of Insurance TribunalScope

Insurance Tribunal could not assume jurisdiction over claims that arose out of insurance policies issued prior to date of commencement of Insurance Ordinance, 2000 i.e., 19-8-2000

Claims hit by such exclusion

Restitution of amount received by claimant to Insurance Companies on claims erroneously executed by Insurance Tribunal

Powers of Insurance Tribunal to adjudicate upon application for restitution under S. 144, C.P.C.

Scope

Appellant Insurance Company impugned order of Insurance Tribunal whereby its application under S. 144, C.P.C. seeking return of amounts received by claimants on ground that insurance claim could not have been adjudicated and executed under Insurance Ordinance, 2000; was returned under O. VII, R. 10, C.P.C., with direction to file same before Civil Court

Contention of appellant, Insurance Company, inter alia, was that Insurance Tribunal had jurisdiction to adjudicate upon application under S. 144, C.P.C. seeking restoration/restitution in regard to amounts unlawfully received by claimant

Validity

By virtue of S. 122 of Insurance Ordinance, 2000, Insurance Tribunal was vested with all powers that a civil court had under C.P.C. including power to order for restitution in terms of S. 144, C.P.C.

Insurance Tribunal, therefore in the present case, had necessary jurisdiction to pass an order upon application filed by Insurance Company

Impugned order was set aside and matter was remanded to Insurance Tribunal to adjudicate upon and pass an order on Insurance Company's application under S. 144, C.P.C.

Appeal was allowed, accordingly.

2014 SCMR 655 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

Ss. 115 & 121Constitution of Pakistan Art. 185(2)Interpretation of S.115 of the Insurance Ordinance, 2000Application of law to insurance policies issued in PakistanRight of insurance policy holder to sue in respect of insurance policy before Insurance TribunalInsurance policies issued before the date of commencement of Insurance Ordinance, 2000Jurisdiction of Insurance Tribunal

Contention was that S.115 of the Insurance Ordinance, 2000 despite its clear wording to the contrary, would also extend to insurance policies issued before the date of the commencement of the Insurance Ordinance, 2000, and consequently, Insurance Tribunal set up under the Insurance Ordinance, 2000 would have jurisdiction to adjudicate upon such matters

Held, that the contention was not only misconceived but was also frivolous as it flew in the face of express wording of the provisions of S.115 of the Insurance Ordinance, 2000.

2014 CLD 506 SUPREME-COURT Judicial Precedent

Ss. 115 & 121Constitution of Pakistan Art. 185(2)Interpretation of S.115 of the Insurance Ordinance, 2000Application of law to insurance policies issued in PakistanRight of insurance policy holder to sue in respect of insurance policy before Insurance TribunalInsurance policies issued before the date of commencement of Insurance Ordinance, 2000Jurisdiction of Insurance Tribunal

Contention was that S.115 of the Insurance Ordinance, 2000 despite its clear wording to the contrary, would also extend to insurance policies issued before the date of the commencement of the Insurance Ordinance, 2000, and consequently, Insurance Tribunal set up under the Insurance Ordinance, 2000 would have jurisdiction to adjudicate upon such matters

Held, that the contention was not only misconceived but was also frivolous as it flew in the face of express wording of the provisions of S.115 of the Insurance Ordinance, 2000.