Back
A. P. SAHI, BHARATKUMAR PANDYA
United India Insurance Company – Appellant
Versus
Anaro Devi – Respondent
ORDER
The dispute in this petition is regarding a claim raised by the complainant under a Standard Fire and Special Perils Insurance Policy (material damage) acquired by the complainant from the petitioner United India Insurance Company Limited for indemnifying the loss of a double storey constructed house in Rohtak. The sum insured was Rs.25,00,000/- and the policy duration was from 15th September, 2009 to the midnight of 14th September, 2010.
2. Heavy rains occurred between 10th August to 15th August, 2010 as a result whereof the soil beneath the building sank on account of water flooding due to the downpour. The subsidence resulted in consequential cracks throughout the building which also leaned in one direction. Not only the insured building but other buildings in the locality suffered the same damage.
3. The complainant sought indemnification but the insurance company in spite of getting the loss surveyed and report submitted to that effect, repudiated the claim. Even though the copy of the repudiation letter is not on record but from paragraph-3 of the impugned order it appears that the said letter was filed as exhibit R-2.
4. Aggrieved by the repudiation, the complainant fi
Findings of fact recorded by State Commission cannot be interfered with in exercise of revisional jurisdiction of this Commission.
Repudiation – complainant has not been able to dislodge the exclusion invoked by the Insurance Company, the repudiation cannot be faulted with.
Insurance – Collapse of building – Where policy in question is for reinstatement, Complainant is entitled for Reinstatement Value of similar building.
Insurance – In absence of requisite evidence from Complainant to support peril covered under policy, no liability can be fastened upon Insurer.
1. Investigated and determined - Merely because recording of evidence is required, or some questions of fact and law arise which would need to be investigated and determined, cannot be a ground for s....
The court affirmed that damages due to inundation are covered under the insurance policy, and failure to provide policy terms invalidated the insurance company's repudiation.
Insurance policy – Exclusion clause – Burden of proof is on the insurer to show that case falls within the purview of exclusion clause – In case of ambiguity, benefit goes to insured.
The Insurer must provide clear evidence for repudiation; mere allegations of defects do not suffice against documented damages.
Lightening Strike - The incident of lightening struck on the insured’s premises is borne out by the reports in the local newspapers and the visit of revenue and police officials to the premises. Ther....
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
