Insurance case laws of Supreme Court on theft of vehicle
manoj gupta
(Querist) 22 May 2008
This query is : Resolved
want to know the latest case laws of supreme court of india on insurance claims about theft of vehicle.
Prakash Yedhula
(Expert) 23 May 2008
Appeal (civil) 3409 of 2008
PETITIONER:National Insurance Co. Ltd
RESPONDENT:Nitin Khandelwal
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 08/05/2008
BENCH:Tarun Chatterjee & Dalveer Bhandari
JUDGMENT:JUDGMENT
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPEALLTE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3409 OF 2008. (Arising out of SLP (Civil) No.20902 of 2006)
National Insurance Co. Ltd. .. Appellant
Versus
Nitin Khandelwal .. Respondent
JUDGMENT
Dalveer Bhandari, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal is preferred against the order dated 21st September, 2006 passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the National Commission) in R. 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 the four passengers had hired the vehicle
for going from Gwalior to Karoli and those passengers, on the
way, snatched the vehicle from the driver. The vehicle was
insured for personal use and it was being used by the
respondent as a taxi. According to the appellant, the
respondent had violated the terms of the insurance policy and,
therefore, rejected the claim. The respondent filed a complaint
before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum,
District Gwalior, M.P. (hereinafter referred to as "the District
Forum").
6. According to the District Forum, the respondent had
violated the terms and conditions of the insurance policy and
that the appellant Insurance Company was justified in
rejecting the claim of the respondent. The respondent,
aggrieved by the said order of the District Forum, filed an
appeal before the M.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal
Commission (hereinafter referred to as "the State
Commission").
7. The State Commission observed that the theft of the
vehicle has not been denied by the Insurance Company.
However, the claim of the respondent under the policy was
repudiated by the Insurance Company solely on the ground
that the vehicle though registered and insured as a private
vehicle, at the time of theft, was being used as a taxi for
carrying passengers on payment. So, the said vehicle was
being used contrary to the terms and conditions of the
insurance policy.
8. The State Commission placed reliance on the decision of
United India 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 & Finance Pvt. Ltd. v. National Insurance Co.
& Others) 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. Rs.4,83,000/- with interest @ 6% from the date of
the complaint till payment.
9. The appellant, aggrieved by the
