Rigours of UAPA Melt Before Article 21: Jharkhand High Court Grants Bail After Six Years of Incarceration Accused Cannot Challenge in Arguments What He Never Challenged in Cross-Examination: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds POCSO Conviction Counterblast Plea, Civil Dispute Defence No Shield When Cognizable Offence Is Disclosed: Allahabad High Court Refuses To Quash FIR Against Ex-Driver Accused Of Outraging Modesty Lawyers Who Burned a Colleague's Furniture for Defending Toll Workers Have Tainted a Noble Profession: Supreme Court A Suspicious Dying Declaration Cannot Hang a Man: Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Murder Conviction IQ of 65, Memory Loss, Frontal Lobe Damage: Supreme Court Holds Brain-Injured Manager Suffered 100% Functional Disability, Enhances Compensation to ₹97.73 Lakh Cannot Be Forced to Pay Gratuity to Retired Employees Who Refuse to Vacate Company Quarters: Supreme Court Victim Who Incited Riot Inside Court Cannot Blame Accused for Trial Delay: Supreme Court Grants Bail in Section 307 Case You Cannot Sell What You Don’t Own: ‘Vendor’s Half Share Means Buyer Gets Only Half’ : Andhra Pradesh High Court Nagaland's Oil Laws Face Constitutional Challenge: Gauhati High Court Sends Union-State Dispute to Supreme Court Order 22 Rule 3 CPC | Will's Validity Cannot Be Decided in Substitution Proceedings: Himachal Pradesh High Court 6-Year-Old Loses Arm To Live 11kV Wire Passing 'Almost Touching' Her Balcony: Punjab & Haryana High Court Awards Rs. 99.93 Lakh To Child Despite Nigam Blaming Father For 'Extending Balcony' Supreme Court Invokes Article 142 To Quash Rape & POCSO Conviction After Marriage Between Accused And Victim NGT Cannot Order Demolition of Temple On Ground of Encroachment of Park: Supreme Court Quashes Removal Order For Want of Jurisdiction Hostile Witnesses & Doubtful Recovery Can Collapse Prosecution: J&K High Court Sets High Threshold for Criminal Proof Compassion Cannot Override the Clock: Karnataka HC Denies Job to Guardian Aunt Despite 2021 Rule Change” Second Marriage During Pendency of Divorce Appeal Is Void: Kerala High Court Appearing in Exam Does Not Cure Attendance Deficiency: MP High Court Upholds 'Year Down' Against BBA Student With Sub-30% Attendance Patna High Court Directs Bihar To Submit Detailed Rehabilitation Plan For Recovered Mental Health Patients, Expand Half-Way Homes Across State Rajasthan High Court Upholds Refusal to Drop Bharat Band Stone-Pelting Case

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