Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.22 seconds)
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Chhotte Lal & Anr. on 18 March, 2026 cites

Mukund Dewangan vs Oriental Ins.Co.Ltd on 11 February, 2016

11. As per view of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mukand Dewangan's case (Supra) if a person is having a driving licence authorizing him to drive LMV commercial vehicle, he do not need a separate driving licence to drive the other transport vehicles of that class/category the gross vehicle weight of which does not exceed 7500 kg. No case law was cited on this point of controversy on behalf of the opposite party-Insurance Company. Resultantly, findings are given that the insurance claim of the complainants has been wrongly repudiated by the Insurance Company on the ground that Ajit Singh was not having a valid and effective driving licence to drive a motor cycle vehicle at the time of accident.
Supreme Court of India Cites 55 - Cited by 2801 - A Mishra - Full Document

Bharti Axa General Insurance Company ... vs Ms. Monu Yadav And Another on 16 July, 2014

13. Even otherwise, the Insurance Regulatory Development Authority IRDA), which control and regulates the Insurance Companies, issued direction not to reject the genuine claims simply because of delay in registration of FIR and intimation to the Insurance Company. In the instructions of the IRDA it RP No. 448 of 2018 Page 5 of 11 was mentioned that claims shall be intimated to the insurer with prescribed documents within a specified number of days is necessary for insurers for effecting various post claim activities like investigation, loss However, this assessment provisioning, claim settlement etc. condition should not prevent settlement of genuine claims, particularly when there is delay in intimation or in submission of documents due to unavoidable circumstances. The insurer's decision to reject a claim shall be based on sound logic and valid grounds. Support to this view can be taken from the case law cited as Bharti Axa General Insurance Company Limited vs. Ms. Monu Yadav and another, 2014(4) PLR 861, decided by Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh. As per facts of that case, the delay in lodging claim with the Insurance Company was of 54 days. The findings in that case were also given in favour of the claimants on the basis of the guidelines issued by IRDA. The Insurance Companies were advised that they must not repudiate such claims on the ground of delay especially when the Police have been promptly informed in this regard.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 19 - R Bahri - Full Document

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. ... vs Akram Hussain & Ors. on 18 July, 2011

Further, the Petitioner placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Akram Hussain & Ors., ILR (2011) V Delhi 437, which squarely addresses the present case that a license for LMV does not authorize driving of a motorcycle. Hence, the present Revision Petition deserves to be allowed and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
Delhi High Court Cites 25 - Cited by 12 - R Khetrapal - Full Document

M/S. Bajaj Alliance General Insurance ... vs Rambha Devi on 13 September, 2023

Further, in M/s. Bajaj Allianz Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Rambha Devi & Anr. (Civil Appeal No. 841 of 2018 decided on 06.11.2024), the Hon‟ble Supreme Court reaffirmed that while there is a limited overlap between LMV and transport vehicle categories, licensing must be strictly interpreted in light of the classification under Section 10(2) of the Act. The decision in Mukund Dewangan was upheld, but nothing therein dilutes the statutory distinction between LMV and motorcycle categories.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1