Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 807 views

    Case Laws Related To Fire Insurance

    Uploaded by

    AnanDu Kr'shna
    1. Fire insurance policies require utmost good faith from both parties. Any misrepresentation of material facts by the insured allows the insurer to reject a claim. 2. Loss from fire must be direct; loss from other causes like rainwater are not covered. 3. Shifting the insured location without informing the insurer violates the contract terms, so claims are not payable. Location is material to the insurance terms and conditions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Case Laws Related To Fire Insurance

    Uploaded by

    AnanDu Kr'shna
    807 views1 page
    1. Fire insurance policies require utmost good faith from both parties. Any misrepresentation of material facts by the insured allows the insurer to reject a claim. 2. Loss from fire must be direct; loss from other causes like rainwater are not covered. 3. Shifting the insured location without informing the insurer violates the contract terms, so claims are not payable. Location is material to the insurance terms and conditions.

    Original Title

    Case Laws Related to Fire Insurance

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1. Fire insurance policies require utmost good faith from both parties. Any misrepresentation of material facts by the insured allows the insurer to reject a claim. 2. Loss from fire must be direct; loss from other causes like rainwater are not covered. 3. Shifting the insured location without informing the insurer violates the contract terms, so claims are not payable. Location is material to the insurance terms and conditions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    807 views1 page

    Case Laws Related To Fire Insurance

    Uploaded by

    AnanDu Kr'shna
    1. Fire insurance policies require utmost good faith from both parties. Any misrepresentation of material facts by the insured allows the insurer to reject a claim. 2. Loss from fire must be direct; loss from other causes like rainwater are not covered. 3. Shifting the insured location without informing the insurer violates the contract terms, so claims are not payable. Location is material to the insurance terms and conditions.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    1.

    Alkesh Saini v SBI General Insurance Company Ltd 2014: Fire


    insurance is a contract of utmost good faith, and therefore party is duty
    bound to disclose each and every material facts, and if there is a
    misrepresentation than the company do have a right to reject due to
    misrepresentation.

    2.  Mr. Jagdish Lal Sharma Vs The National Insurance Company


    Ltd. 2016 : Fire insurance covers the loss which is directly related to the
    outbreak of fire any loss which is outside the purview of direct loss will not
    be covered. In this case the claim was rejected on the ground that there was
    direct of the rain water which destroyed the goods, since there was presence
    of rain water which is a natural thing and . outside the purview of insurance.
    If it would have been the presence of water due to bursting of a pipeline than
    the situation would have been a different and it might would have been
    covered under the insurance.

    3.  Shri. M. S. A. Kajalwala Vs Oriental Insurance Company 2014 : if the


    location has been shifeted from one place to other than it is the duty of the
    insured party that they must need to disclose this to the insurance company
    since the t&c of the contracts are based in accordance with the location itself
    and if it is changed than it simply means that the prime essence of contract
    has been vititated. Therefore claim is not payable if location has been
    shifted.

    4. Mr. Amar P. Saxena – Vs – The Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd : if


    a claim has been raised by the claimant in accordance with day zero cost i.e.
    initial cost of the product than the company is not bound to pay the initial
    cost of the product. The company will be paying the cost of the damaged
    product after deducting the depreciated cost, which simply means the
    company will be paying only the current standing cost.

    5. Mr. T. Sasidharan nair Vs The United India Insurance Ltd 2016: it was
    held in this case that while giving the claim the reasonable nexus need to be
    adjudged and even if the claim is indirect one but if it falls under the
    reasonable nexus than the claim must be settled down.

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy