 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
 |
 |
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
 |
 |
|
||||||||||
 |
|
|||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Report No. 190 Final recommendations of the Law Commission in regard to Section 39 7.1.14 After considering all the responses and reexamining the entire issue, the final recommendations of the Law Commission regard to section 39 may be summarised as under: (a) A clear distinction be made in the provision itself between a beneficial nominee and a collector nominee. (b) It is not possible to agree to the suggestion made by some of the insurers that in all cases the payment to the nominee would tantamount to a full discharge of the insurer's liability under the policy and that unless the contrary is expressed, the nominee would be the beneficial nominee. (c) An option be given to the policyholder to clearly express whether the nominee will collect the money on behalf of the legal representatives (in other words such nominee will be the collector nominee) or whether the nominee will be the absolute owner of the monies in which case such nominee will be the beneficial nominee. (d) A proviso be added to make the nomination effectual for the nominee to receive the policy money in case the policyholder dies after the maturity of the policy but before it can be encashed.    |
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||
 |
|
|||||||||||
 |
|
 |
|
|||||||||
Back