All

Insurance Policy which covers “own damage”

advtanmoy 26/01/2019

In Dhanraj v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and Anr.[  the Supreme Court considered a policy which covered “own damage” and held that under the policy of insurance in that case under the heading “own damage” words “premium on vehicle and non-electrical accessories” appear and on the terms and conditions of the said policy held that the premium that was paid was towards damage to vehicle and not for injury to the person of the owner. Thus, the expression “own damage” will have to be read along with the express terms and conditions of the insurance policy and if on a reading of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy, it is found that the premium that is paid for “own damage” covers only damage to the property of the insured and not to injury to the person of the owner or life of the owner, then obviously the insurer would not be liable for compensation for injury or death of the owner, but if on a reading of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy it is found that additional premium has been paid not only for damage to property but also for injury or death of the owner then the insurance company will also be liable for compensation for injury or death of the owner in addition to loss of property. Accordingly, we answer question No. (d), referred to us by the Division Bench of saying that it will ultimately depend upon the terms and conditions of the insurance policy and the premium or additional premium paid and the purpose for which premium or additional premium has been paid for coming to the conclusion whether “own damage” would cover damage to the person of the owner or will be confined to the properties of the vehicle owner.

Next Post

The difference between an earnest money or deposit and an advance

Sat Jan 26 , 2019
Section 74 of the Indian Contract Act is clearly an attempt to eliminate the somewhat elaborate refinements made under the English common law in distinguishing between stipulations providing for payment of liquidated damages and stipulations in the nature of penalty.

You May Like

  • A judge is the pillar of entire justice system and public has a right to demand virtually irreproachable conduct from a judge (SC-10/12/2019) - A person discharging judicial duties acts on behalf of the State in discharge of its sovereign functions. Dispensation of justice is not only an onerous duty but has been considered as akin to discharge of a pious duty, and therefore, is a very serious matter. The standards of probity, conduct, integrity that may be relevant for discharge of duties by a careerist in another job cannot be the same for a judicial officer. A judge holds the office of a public trust. Impeccable integrity, unimpeachable independence with moral values embodied to the core are absolute imperatives which brooks no compromise. A judge is the pillar of the entire justice system and the public has a right to demand virtually irreproachable conduct from anyone performing a judicial function. Judges must strive for the highest standards of integrity in both their professional and personal lives.
  • A daughter has no right u/s 14 of Hindu Succession Act of her father’s property if it is occupied by her brother through adverse possession (SC-28/08/2023) - A Hindu daughter has no right u/s 14 of Hindu Succession Act on the property of her father if it is occupied by her brother through adverse possession (SC-28/08/2023)- [See Pritam Singh v. State, AIR (1950) SC 169: (1950) SCR 453, Hem Raj v. State of Ajmer AIR (1954) SC 462: (1954) SCR 1133, Bengal Chemical & Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Employees, AIR (1959) SC 633: 1959 Supp (2) SCR 136: (1959) 1 LLJ 413, Municipal Board, Pratabgarh and Anr. v. Mahendra Singh Chawla and Ors. (1982) 3 SCC 331: (1983) SCC (L&S) 19, Taherakhatoon (dead) by LRs v. Salambin Mohammad (1999) 2 SCC 635]

Jurisprudence

Recent Updates

%d bloggers like this: