Jaina Construction Company

vs.

The Oriental Insurance Company Limited and Ors.

I(2022)CPJ119(SC)

Policy type- Motor Insurance Policy

The insurer repudiated the insured’s claim in toto on the ground that there was a delay in informing the insurance company regarding the theft of the vehicle. The condition in question mandated the insured to give immediate notice to the insurer of the accidental loss/damage but was given by the insured after a lapse of 5 months from the loss. Relying on Gurshinder Singh v. Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. and Anr. 2020 (11) SCC 612, the Supreme Court observed since the FIR was lodged immediately on the next day of the occurrence of theft of the vehicle by the insured and the vehicle could not be traced out, a delay of about five months in informing and lodging the claim with the insurer would not be fatal. The Court held that when the insurer has repudiated the claim only on the ground of delay, and the claim of the insured was not found to be not genuine, the insurer’s repudiation could not be sustained.

Series Navigation<< Duties of an insurer, when a policy holder seeks renewal of an existing policy?What are the rules to be observed for making a proposal for insurance? >>

Author

This entry is part 15 of 17 in the series April 2023 - Insurance Times

Byadmin

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *