Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
B.S. BHANUMATHI
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Nadigam Subadra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
B.S. BHANUMATHI, J.
1. This appeal is filed under section 173 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT , 1988, against the award and the decree, dated 01.02.2005, in O.P.No.89 of 2000 on the file of the Court of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-II Additional District Judge, Madanapalle (for short ‘the Tribunal’). The parties are arrayed as before the Tribunal. The 1st to 5th respondents herein are the claimants. The respondent No.6 herein is the 1st respondent and the 7th and 8th respondents herein are the 3rd and 4th respondents before the Tribunal. The appellant is the 2nd respondent before the Tribunal.
2. The case of the claimants, is briefly, as follows:
The claimants are the legal representatives of Nadigam Venkatramana (hereinafter referred to as ‘the deceased’). They sought compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- on the ground that the deceased died in a motor vehicle accident on 29.08.1999 due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the jeep bearing No.AP 03 D 5996, insured with the 4th respondent and owned by the 3rd respondent, as the jeep dashed against a maxi cab van bearing registration No.KA 01 3265, owned by the 1st respondent and insured with the 2nd respondent wh
Insurance companies remain liable for compensation despite policy cancellations due to non-payment, requiring proof of such cancellations when contested.
An insurance company cannot absolve itself from liability for a motor vehicle accident unless it proves the insured's failure to pay premium through substantial evidence, regardless of policy issues ....
An insurance policy remains in effect unless properly cancelled before an accident; insurers are liable to indemnify third-party claims unless valid evidence shows policy cancellation.
The liability of the insurer under the insurance policy and the requirement to prove cancellation of the policy and intimation to the owner of the vehicle prior to the accident.
The insurance policy was deemed valid at the time of the accident, and the insurance company failed to prove its cancellation, thus liable for compensation.
Insurer remains liable for compensation unless the policy is cancelled and the insured is notified prior to the accident, despite a dishonoured cheque for premium.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the liability of the insurance company to indemnify the insured in cases of motor vehicle accidents, emphasizing the importance of timely intimatio....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
