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

1957 Supreme(P&H) 141

TEK CHAND
Chuni Lal Dwarka Nath – Appellant
Versus
Hartford Fire Insurance Co. Ltd. – Respondent


Judgement Key Points

What is the time limit for making a claim to the insurance company under Section 18(6) of the Displaced Persons (Debts Adjustment) Act, 1951? What is the meaning of "loss" in the context of insurance claims under the Act and whether loss may occur due to deprivation or fear of loss prior to actual looting? Which party is entitled to damages where multiple claimants exist and how is the insurance money to be distributed under Section 18(3) of the Act?

Key Points: - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!) - (!)

What is the time limit for making a claim to the insurance company under Section 18(6) of the Displaced Persons (Debts Adjustment) Act, 1951?

What is the meaning of "loss" in the context of insurance claims under the Act and whether loss may occur due to deprivation or fear of loss prior to actual looting?

Which party is entitled to damages where multiple claimants exist and how is the insurance money to be distributed under Section 18(3) of the Act?


Judgment

Tek Chand, J.

1. This is a first appeal from the order of the Senior Subordinate Judge, Gurdas-pur, acting as Tribunal under the Displaced Persons (Debts Adjustment) Act, 1951, dismissing the appellants application under Section 18 of the Act. The appellant is a firm which was carrying on business as commission agents at Sialkot before the partition of the country. It transacted its business through the Punjab and Sind Bank, Limited, and in 1947 the appellant had deposited goods like sugar, gur, shakkar, etc., with the Bank; exceeding rupees three lacs in value as against which the Bank was to supply credit to the extent of 75 per cent of their value. According to the terms of agreement between the appellant-firm and the Bank all securities, which bad been and were to be delivered to the Bank, had to be insured by the appellant as the borrower and in case oi failure to do so the Bank was at liberty to effect such insurances at the er-pense of the borrower. This agreement referred to insurance against fire risk. It was also agreed that all sums received under any such insurances would be applied towards liquidation of the balance due to the Bank for the time being. In accord








































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