9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (5) TMI 763X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... P. No. 2638 of 2006. 3. Brief facts of the case which are necessary to dispose of the matter are recapitulated as under: 4. The respondent Nitin Khandelwal had purchased the vehicle Mahindra Scorpio bearing No. HR-18-8743 on 28.5.2003. On 27.9.2003, he had sent his vehicle to bring his children from Jaipur. On the way, some unknown people stopped the vehicle, tied the driver and dumped him on the way and snatched away the vehicle. The report was lodged by the driver at the police station and the appellant Insurance Company was informed of the same. Thereafter, on 2.10.2003, the respondent filed an insurance claim, which was rejected by the Insurance Company. 5. The appellant's version was that the vehicle was being used as a taxi and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dia Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Gian Singh 2006 CTJ 221 (CP) (NCDRC) wherein it was held by the National Commission that in a case of violation of condition of the policy as to the nature of use of the vehicle, the claim ought to be settled on non-standard basis. Similar view was taken by the State Commission in Appeal No. 1463 of 2004 (Track Way Securities and Finance Pvt. Ltd. v. National Insurance Co. and Ors.) decided on 23.3.2006. Relying on the said judgment, the State Commission observed that the claim of the respondent herein ought to be settled on non-standard basis and the complainant respondent was thus entitled to the 75% of the sum insured. Consequently, the State Commission directed the appellant herein to pay 75% of the amount i.e. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been stolen, therefore, in the case of theft of vehicle, the breach of condition is not germane. In Kusum Rai's case (supra), the cases of Jitendra Kumar v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and Anr. AIR 2003 SC 4161 and National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Swaran Singh and Ors. AIR 2004 SC 1531 were also considered. This Court in Jitendra Kumar's case, in paras 9 and 10, observed as under: 9. The question then is; can the Insurance Company repudiate a claim made by the owner of the vehicle which is duly insured with the company, solely on the ground that the driver of the vehicle who had nothing to do with the accident did not hold a valid licence? The answer to this question, in our opinion, should be in the negative. Section 149 of the Mo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 13. In the case in hand, the vehicle has been snatched or stolen. In the case of theft of vehicle breach of condition is not germane. The appellant Insurance Company is liable to indemnify the owner of the vehicle when the insurer has obtained comprehensive policy for the loss caused to the insurer. The respondent submitted that even assuming that there was a breach of condition of the insurance policy, the appellant Insurance Company ought to have settled the claim on non-standard basis. The Insurance Company cannot repudiate the claim in toto in case of loss of vehicle due to theft. 14. In the instant case, the State Commission allowed the claim only on non-standard basis, which has been upheld by the National Commission. On considerat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
