Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2016 (8) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (8) TMI 1469 - SC - Indian LawsRule of contra proferentem - Burglary/Theft/house breaking - scope of insurance cover - case of the Appellant is that forcible entry is not required for a claim to be made under the policy - HELD THAT:- There is no error committed by the MRTP Commission in rejecting the Claim of the Appellant. It is clear from the facts of the present case that the Appellant has made out a case of theft without a forcible entry. The case of the Appellant is that forcible entry is not required for a claim to be made under the policy. Following the well-accepted principle that a contract of insurance which is like any other commercial contract should be interpreted strictly, we are of the opinion that the policy covers loss or damage by burglary or house breaking which have been explained as theft following an actual, forcible and violent entry from the premises. A plain reading of the policy would show that a forcible entry should precede the theft, and unless they are proved, the claim cannot be accepted. It is well-settled law that there is no difference between a contract of insurance and any other contract, and that it should be construed strictly without adding or deleting anything from the terms thereof - On applying the said principle, we have no doubt that a forcible entry is required for a claim to be allowed under the policy for burglary/house breaking. The order of the MRTP Commission upheld - appeal dismissed.
|