Bail | Right to Speedy Trial is a Fundamental Right Under Article 21: PH High Court    |     Postal Department’s Power to Enhance Penalties Time-Barred, Rules Allahabad High Court    |     Tenants Cannot Cross-Examine Landlords Unless Relationship is Disputed: Madras High Court    |     NDPS | Conscious Possession Extends to Vehicle Drivers: Telangana High Court Upholds 10-Year Sentence in Ganja Trafficking Case    |     Aid Reduction Of Without Due Process Unlawful: Rajasthan High Court Restores Full Grants for Educational Institutions    |     Assessment of Notional Income in Absence of Proof Cannot Be 'Mathematically Precise,' Says Patna High Court    |     NCLT's Resolution Plan Overrides State Tax Claims: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Demands Against Patanjali Foods    |     An Agreement is Not Voidable if the Party Could Discover the Truth with Ordinary Diligence: Calcutta High Court Quashes Termination of LPG Distributorship License    |     Independent Witnesses Contradict Prosecution's Story: Chhattisgarh High Court Acquit Accused in Arson Case    |     Merely Being a Joint Account Holder Does Not Attract Liability Under Section 138 of NI Act:  Gujarat High Court    |     Higher Court Cannot Reappreciate Evidence Unless Perversity is Found: Himachal Pradesh High Court Refused to Enhance Maintenance    |     Perpetual Lease Allows Division of Property: Delhi High Court Affirms Partition and Validity of Purdah Wall    |     "Party Autonomy is the Backbone of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Upholds Sole Arbitrator Appointment Despite Party’s Attempts to Frustrate Arbitration Proceedings    |     Videography in Temple Premises Limited to Religious Functions: Kerala High Court Orders to Restrict Non-Religious Activities on Temple Premises    |     Past Service Must Be Counted for Pension Benefits: Jharkhand High Court Affirms Pension Rights for Daily Wage Employees    |     'Beyond Reasonable Doubt’ Does Not Mean Beyond All Doubt: Madras High Court Upholds Life Imprisonment for Man Convicted of Murdering Mother-in-Law    |    

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.

Similar News