Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 24 (0.27 seconds)
M/S.Acme Commodities Private Limited vs The Oriental Insurance Company Limited on 27 June, 2023 cites

Saurashtra Chemicals Ltd.(Presently ... vs National Insurance Co. Ltd. on 13 December, 2019

“16.2. To ensure that all rights against carriers, bailees or other third parties are properly preserved and exercised and the Underwriters will, in addition to any loss recoverable hereunder, reimburse the assured for any charges properly and reasonably incurred in pursuance of these duties.” 12.5. Therefore, it is the duty of the plaintiff to ensure all rights against a carrier are preserved. However, at the time of repudiating the claim, the defendants have not raised a ground that the plaintiff violated this obligation under Clause 16(2) of the Contract by his failure to preserve all rights against the carrier. Therefore, as held in Saurashtra Chemicals Limited Vs. National Insurance Company Limited case, cited supra, the defendants are not entitled to take a new ground, which were not mentioned in the letter of repudiation and contend that the plaintiff violated its obligation under Clause 16(2) of Contract of Insurance Act. Therefore, the issue No.3 is answered in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 30 - K Murari - Full Document

E.I.D. Parry (India) Ltd. vs Far Eastern Marine Transport Co. Ltd. ... on 2 April, 1983

12.1. The learned counsel for the defendants vehemently contended that non-joinder of sea carrier is fatal to the suit. The learned counsel by relying on Ex.P36-E-mail communication between the plaintiff and the defendants submitted that when offer was made to the plaintiff by the defendants to pay 50% of the claim under items 2 and 3 to the tune of Rs.1,55,07,480/-, the plaintiff expressed their willingness to accept that offer without providing right of subrogation to the insurer. Further, the learned counsel relied on decision of this Court reported in EID Parry India Limited Vs For Eastern Marine Transport Company Limited reported in 1988 (1) LW 320, in this regard. A perusal of Ex.P41-repudiation letter addressed by the defendants to the plaintiff would indicate the defendants have not repudiated the contract of Insurance, on the ground that the plaintiff violated Clause-16 of the Contract which imposed an obligation on the plaintiff to take necessary action to protect the right of subrogation available to the defendants.
Madras High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 8 - Full Document
1   2 3 Next