The Contra Proferentem Rule V

The rule of interpretation of Contra Proferentem has been pressed into service. As observed in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pushpalaya Printers, 2004 (3) SCC 694 :

“It is also settled position in law that if there is any ambiguity or a term is capable of two possible interpretations, one beneficial to the insured should be accepted consistent with the purpose for which the policy is taken, namely, to cover the risk on the happening of a certain event. Where the words of a document are ambiguous, they shall be construed against the party who prepared the document.”

As observed in Industrial Promotion & Investment Corporation of Orissa Ltd. v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., (2016) 15 SCC 315:

“The common law rule of construction ‘verba chartarum fortius accipiuntur contra proferentem’ means that ambiguity in the wording of the policy is to be resolved against the party who prepared it.”

In our opinion, the rule mentioned above of Contra Proferentem does not apply to the present case.

Hon’ble Justice Arun Mishra, Union of India v. Association of Unified Telecom Service Providers, [Civil Appeal Nos. 6328-6399 of 2015].