Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.21 seconds)M/S. Complete Insulations (P) Ltd vs New India Assurance Company Ltd on 21 November, 1995
27) In the landmark ruling of Complete Insulations
(P) Ltd. v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (1996) 1 SCC
221, a three-judge bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court ,
the scope of "deemed transfer" under Section 157 of the
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was clarified. The said case
CS (COMM.) No.2895/2024, Tarannum Parveen Vs. M/s ICICI
Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd.
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Enamul Haque on 4 September, 2019
29) The legal principles established in Complete
Insulations (P) Ltd. and Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v.
Enamul Haque have been consistently extended to theft
cases, fundamentally changing how insurance claims are
treated after a vehicle is sold. The core reason these
judgments apply to theft is that theft is legally categorized
as "Own Damage" (OD) rather than a third-party risk.
Since the "deemed transfer" under Section 157 of the
Motor Vehicles Act only applies to third-party liabilities, a
buyer who fails to transfer the insurance policy has no
legal standing to claim for the loss of the vehicle due to
theft.
Section 17 in The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [Entire Act]
Section 379 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Sushil Kumar Godara on 30 September, 2021
31) In United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Sushil Kumar
Godara [(2021) 15 SCC 105 / MANU/SC/0743/2021] the
CS (COMM.) No.2895/2024, Tarannum Parveen Vs. M/s ICICI
Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd.
Jai Prakash vs 1. Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. ... on 17 May, 2013
32) In Budhi Prakash Jain v. Bajaj Allianz General
Insurance Co. [(2015) NCDRC (National Commission)]
the complainant purchased a vehicle but failed to transfer
the insurance policy into his name. The vehicle was
subsequently stolen. Citing Complete Insulations, the
Hon'ble NCDRC held that since the complainant did not
apply for the transfer within the 14-day window as per
GR-17, there was no privity of contract between him and
the insurer. The theft claim was rejected because the
"deemed transfer" under Section 157 does not apply to
property loss/theft.
1