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

2007 Supreme(Kar) 460

ANAND BYRAREDDY
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
SURESH CHANDRAYYA HALADEVARAMATH – Respondent


( 1 ) THE insurer is in appeal challenging the liability fastened, on it.

( 2 ) THE brief facts as would be necessary for disposal of this appeal are as follows: one Irayya Suresh Haladevarnath died as a result of an accident caused by a truck belonging to the third respondent herein, on 7. 5. 2002. His parents, the respondents 1 and 2 herein filed a claim petition seeking compensation on the death of their son. It is seen that the offending vehicle was covered under a policy of insurance issued by the appellant, on 15. 1. 2002. It however, transpires that on 5. 2. 2002, the cheque which was issued towards payment of premium, by the insured is said to have been dishonoured. This fact was intimated to the insured-third respondent. He was also intimated of the cancellation of policy for want of premium, by a registered letter dated 13. 2. 2002, by the appellant. In terms of Rule 10 of Third Party Insurance Rules, the appellant had also intimated the concerned Regional Transport officer, Kolhapur, as regards the cancellation of policy. Documents in respect of such despatch of intimation of cancellation of policy, by registered post, have been produced in evidence and marked as Ex. R1






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