Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 16 (0.23 seconds)M/S Modern Insulators Ltd vs The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd on 22 February, 2000
In M/s Modern Insulators Ltd. Vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., AIR, 2000 SC 1014, the Supreme Court held that:-
Section 1 in Consumer Protection Act, 2019 [Entire Act]
National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Nitin Khandelwal on 8 May, 2008
In United India Insurance Co. ltd. vs. Bhupinder Singh (RP/473/2013), the car owner filed claims for damages and later for theft, but the insurance company rejected both claims, citing the owner's alleged improper use of a no-claim bonus. The district forum ruled in favor of the owner, directing the insurer to cover the car's cost, compensate for mental agony and harassment, and cover litigation expenses. On appeal, the State Commission reduced the interest rate and canceled the compensation. Subsequently, the insurance company filed a Revision Petition, alleging the owner misrepresented policy details. Referring to the precedent set by National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Nitin Khandelwal (2008) 11 SCC 259, this Commission modified the State Commission's order, directing the insurer to settle the claim on a non-standard basis and pay 75% of the amount, deducting the no-claim bonus. This case mirrors the petitioner's factual and legal arguments.
The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
Ashok Kumar Srivastav vs National Insurance Company, Limited & ... on 27 April, 1998
Ashok Kumar vs. National insurance Co. Ltd. (RP/4045/2014), the national Commission observed that:-
Life Insurance Corporation Of India vs Smt. G.M. Channabasemma on 6 December, 1990
Further State Commission has also correctly relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in LIC of India Vs. Smt. G.M. Channabasamma (1991) 1 SCC 357 in which it was held that a contract of 'insurance' is a contract of 'uberrima fides' and there must be complete good faith on the part of the assured. The State Commission in its order has observed as follows:-
Manmohan Nanda vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd. . on 6 December, 2021
In Manmohan Nanda Vs. United India Assurance Company Limited and Anr. (2022) 4 SCC 582, Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that Insurance contracts are special contracts based on the general principles of full disclosure inasmuch as a person seeking insurance is bound to disclose all material facts relating to the risk involved. Law demands a higher standard of good faith in matters of insurance contracts which is expressed in the legal maxim uberrimae fidei.
Bajaj Allianz Lic Ltd vs Dalbir Kaur on 11 January, 2019
Similar observations were made by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Branch Manager, Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Company Limited & Others Vs. Dalbir Kaur (2021) 13 SCC 553, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the insurance claim can be repudiated on the grounds of non-disclosure of true and full material information sought in the proposal form.
Rubi(Chandra) Dutta vs M/S United India Insurance Co.Ltd on 18 March, 2011
11. In view of the foregoing, we tend to agree with the findings of the State Commission that the Respondent/Insurance Company was justified in repudiating the claim on account of non-disclosure of facts with respect to the 'No Claim Bonus' under the earlier policy. As was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rubi Chandra Dutta Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. [(2011) 11 SCC 269], the scope in a Revision Petition is limited. Such powers can be exercised only if there is some prima facie jurisdictional error appearing in the impugned order.