Punjab-Haryana High Court
National Insurance Company Limited vs Kripal Singh on 17 October, 2014
Author: K. Kannan
Bench: K. Kannan
CWP No.21506 of 2014 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CWP No.21506 of 2014
Date of Decision.17.10.2014
National Insurance Company Limited ......Petitioner
Versus
Kripal Singh and others ......Respondents
Present: Mr. Nitin Gupta, Advocate
for the petitioner.
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the
judgment ?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
-.-
K. KANNAN J. (ORAL)
1. The insurance company is unfair to approach this Court for what is surely a liability on its part to satisfy the claim of the legal heir of the deceased registered owner of a motor cycle. The claim had been made by the legal heir contending that the vehicle had been lost and also filed in proof the fact of registration of a complaint on the same day when the vehicle was lost. The insurance company took a plea that since the registered owner is not alive and a change in the registration had not obtained in the name of the legal heir, there had been a violation of terms of policy. The counsel would read to me clause 9 which only requires a legal heir who may give application for transfer of the registration. There is no particular mandate that if the change of registration had not taken place, the right to ownership of the vehicle will be lost or that a right to enforce a claim for theft of the vehicle ensured against such theft could go without a remedy. PANKAJ KUMAR 2014.10.27 16:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.21506 of 2014 -2-
2. The Lok Adalat has considered the objection regarding the fact that a change in registration had not occurred in the name of the complainant by observing that ownership to the property cannot remain in vacuum and if registered owner had died and the legal heir was making a claim that during the time when the vehicle was in his possession the vehicle had been lost there cannot be denial of liability. I find no reason to differ with the same.
3. The writ petition is a vexatious attempt on the part of the insurance company and waste of public funds. The writ petition is dismissed.
(K. KANNAN) JUDGE October 17, 2014 Pankaj* PANKAJ KUMAR 2014.10.27 16:28 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh