Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.59 seconds)
Mohd. Unis vs United India Ins. Co. Ltd. on 3 February, 2014 cites

National Insurance Co. Ltd vs Nitin Khandelwal on 8 May, 2008

In the present case admittedly the petitioner had taken a comprehensive policy for the vehicle in question and, as such, keeping in view the ratio in the case of National Insurance Company Limited v. Nitin Khandelwal (2008 (7) SCALE 351) reiterated in the case of Amalendu Sahoo, the District Forum rightly accepted the claim of the petitioner on non-standard basis. The State Commission failed to appreciate the fine distinction between the two judgments of the Honble Supreme Court and hence, the impugned order cannot be sustained in the eye of law and is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, we accept the revision petition, set aside the impugned order and confirm the order of the District Forum with the parties bearing their own costs.
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 458 - D Bhandari - Full Document

Amalendu Sahu vs Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd on 25 March, 2010

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that even though there was violation of a condition of the policy regarding use of the vehicle in question for hire and reward as alleged by the respondent insurance company, keeping this aspect in view, the District Forum had rightly accepted the claim on non-standard basis since the decision of the District Forum is in line with the view taken by the Supreme Court in the case of Amalendu Sahoo vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. (2010 CTJ 485 SC).
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 350 - Full Document

M/S.Suraj Mal Ram Niwas Oil Mills (P)Ltd vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr on 8 October, 2010

7. On the other hand, in the case of Suraj Mal Ram Niwas Oil Mills (P.) Ltd. the Apex Court has laid emphasis on the need for the courts to strictly construe the terms of a contract of insurance in terms of the words used therein without adding, deleting or substituting any words. However, this observation was specifically with reference to the question of coverage of the risk under the policy so as to determine the extent of liability of the insurer. In other words, if a particular risk is not covered by the words of the policy, it would not be open to the courts to add, delete or substitute any of the words used in the contract and the terms of the insurance contract have to be strictly construed without any exception made on the ground of equity by the courts. This celebrated ruling holds good without any doubt but facts of this case and the issue involved therein are different and as such, in our view the State Commission wrongly relied on the judgment of the Suraj Mal Ram Niwas Oil Mills case while setting aside the order of the District forum. In this context, it would be fair and just to reproduce the following observations of the Apex Court in Para 24 of the judgment:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 272 - D K Jain - Full Document

United India Insurance Co. Ltd vs Shri Gian Chand And Others on 2 September, 1997

12. Reference in this case may be made to the decision of National Commission rendered in the case of United India Insurance Company Limited v. Gian Singh reported in 2006 CTJ 221 (CP) (NCDRC). In that decision of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) it has been held that in a case of violation of condition of the policy as to the nature of use of the vehicle, the claim ought to be settled on a non-standard basis.
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 223 - S B Majmudar - Full Document
1