Renewal Is Not Extension Unless Terms Are Fixed in Same Deed: Bombay High Court Strikes Down ₹64.75 Lakh Stamp Duty Demand on Nine-Year Lease Fraud Vitiates All Solemn Acts—Appointment Void Ab Initio Even After 27 Years: Allahabad High Court Litigants Cannot Be Penalised For Attending Criminal Proceedings Listed On Same Day: Delhi High Court Restores Civil Suit Dismissed For Default Limited Permissive Use Confers No Right to Expand Trademark Beyond Agreed Territories: Bombay High Court Enforces Consent Decree in ‘New Indian Express’ Trademark Dispute Assam Rifles Not Entitled to Parity with Indian Army Merely Due to Similar Duties: Delhi High Court Dismisses Equal Pay Petition Conspiracy Cannot Be Presumed from Illicit Relationship: Bombay High Court Acquits Wife, Affirms Conviction of Paramour in Murder Case Bail in NDPS Commercial Quantity Cases Cannot Be Granted Without Satisfying Twin Conditions of Section 37: Delhi High Court Cancels Bail Orders Terming Them ‘Perversely Illegal’ Article 21 Rights Not Absolute In Cases Threatening National Security: Supreme Court Sets Aside Bail Granted In Jnaneshwari Express Derailment Case A Computer Programme That Solves a Technical Problem Is Not Barred Under Section 3(k): Madras High Court Allows Patent for Software-Based Data Lineage System Premature Auction Without 30-Day Redemption Violates Section 176 and Bank’s Own Terms: Orissa High Court Quashes Canara Bank’s Gold Loan Sale Courts Can’t Stall Climate-Resilient Public Projects: Madras High Court Lifts Status Quo on Eco Park, Pond Works at Race Club Land No Cross-Examination, No Conviction: Gujarat High Court Quashes Customs Penalty for Violating Principles of Natural Justice ITAT Was Wrong in Disregarding Statements Under Oath, But Additions Unsustainable Without Corroborative Evidence: Madras High Court Deduction Theory Under Old Land Acquisition Law Has No Place Under 2013 Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Enhances Compensation for Metro Land Acquisition UIT Cannot Turn Around After Issuing Pattas, It's Estopped Now: Rajasthan High Court Private Doctor’s Widow Eligible for COVID Insurance if Duty Proven: Supreme Court Rebukes Narrow Interpretation of COVID-Era Orders Smaller Benches Cannot Override Constitution Bench Authority Under The Guise Of Clarification: Supreme Court Criticises Judicial Indiscipline Public Premises Act, 1971 | PP Act Overrides State Rent Control Laws for All Tenancies; Suhas Pophale Overruled: Supreme Court Court Has No Power To Reduce Sentence Below Statutory Minimum Under NDPS Act: Supreme Court Denies Relief To Young Mother Convicted With 23.5 kg Ganja Non-Compliance With Section 52-A Is Not Per Se Fatal: Supreme Court Clarifies Law On Sampling Procedure Under NDPS Act MBA Degree Doesn’t Feed the Stomach: Delhi High Court Says Wife’s Qualification No Ground to Deny Maintenance

Supreme Court Rules Insurance Claim Cannot Be Totally Repudiated Due to Delay in Intimation

04 September 2024 10:52 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Hon'ble Bench of Justices J.K. Maheshwari and K.V. Viswanathan delivered a landmark judgment on July 31, 2023, addressing the contentious issue of insurance claim repudiation. The case involved an insurance claim dispute where the insurance company rejected the claim on the grounds of the insured's delay in intimating them about the theft and alleged negligence in leaving the key in the ignition during the incident.

The court, while analyzing the relevant conditions of the insurance policy, observed, "When an insured has lodged the FIR immediately after the theft of a vehicle occurred and when the police after investigation have lodged a final report after the vehicle was not traced, the insured would be in a position to lodge his claim for compensation. Mere delay in intimating the insurance company about the occurrence of the theft cannot be a ground to deny the claim of the insured." (Para 12)

The Bench highlighted the principles laid down in previous judgments, particularly the cases of Nitin Khandelwal and Amalendu Sahoo, which emphasized that any violation of the policy condition should be considered a fundamental breach to deny the claimant the entire amount. (Para 15)

Relying on the precedents, the court concluded that "in the present case, on facts, completely different, as there is no breach of Condition No.1 because the intimation to the police was immediate... Even if there was some carelessness, on the peculiar facts of this case, it was not a fundamental breach of Condition No.5 warranting total repudiation." (Para 16)

The court further noted that the insurance company's own guidelines for settling claims on a non-standard basis, such as in the case of negligence, should be followed. Consequently, the court awarded 75% of the admissible claim to the appellant, upholding the District Forum and State Commission's decision. (Para 20)

This ruling sets a crucial precedent, affirming that mere delay in intimation cannot result in total repudiation of an insurance claim. The judgment emphasizes the need to assess the breach of conditions on a proportionate basis, safeguarding the rights of policyholders while ensuring insurers can address genuine concerns.

Insurance companies will now be required to consider each claim on its merits, taking into account contributory factors, before repudiating claims entirely. This judgment ensures a fair and balanced approach to insurance claims, providing policyholders with greater protection and strengthening the foundation of insurance law in the country.

Date of Decision: July 31, 2023

Ashok Kumar  vs New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

Latest Legal News