SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1997 Supreme(SC) 1612

S. P. BHARUCHA, SUHAS C. SEN, J. S. VERMA
Oriental Insurance Company LTD. – Appellant
Versus
Inderjit Kaur – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Bharucha, J.-Leave granted.

2. This appeal is heard by a Bench of 3 Judges because learned counsel for the appellant, the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., had submitted that the decision of this Court in United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Ayed Mohammed & Ors.1, had been misread by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and the High Court and that, while the appellant would pay the amount of compensation awarded in this matter, it desired, in view of the general importance of the question, an authoritative pronouncement.

3. For the purposes of the appeal, therefore, very few facts are relevant. A bus met with an accident. Its policy of insurance was issued by the appellant on 30th November, 1989. The premium for the policy was paid by cheque. The cheque was dishonoured. A letter stating that it had been dishonoured was sent by the appellant to the insured on 23rd January, 1990. The letter claimed, that, as the cheque had not been encashed, the premium on the policy had not been received and that, therefore, the appellant was not at risk. The premium was paid in cash on 2nd May, 1990. In the meantime, on 19th April, 1990, the accident took place: the bus collided with a truck, whose dr





























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top