Esheria India Case Law
Sign in
India Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

India Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
0 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter India case law

Results update automatically as you type.

India decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Insurance

M/S BENGANI FOOD PRODUCTS PVT LTD AND ANOTHER versus NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND OTHERS

Repudiation was valid because under Clause 5 the policy coverage ceased upon unloading at the destination siding in the absence of any declaration or arrangement bringing Shalimar within the warehouse-to-warehouse or seven-day continuation; additionally the insured breached Clause 8 by failing to take reasonable precautions (inadequate packing/covering) and by non-disclosure of subsequent movement of stock, undermining the claim; the relevant policy clauses are clear so contra proferentem does not apply.

Source excerpt

  • Repudiation of insurance claim
  • Interpretation of policy clauses
  • Duty of utmost good faith (uberrima fides)
  • Contra proferentem
  • Insured's duty to mitigate loss
Read case analysis
Motor vehicles

THE ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED versus SMT. HONNAMMA & ORS.

Because the insured tractor was the root cause of the sequence of events leading to the trailer overturning and the death, the insurer of the tractor is liable for the compensation awarded for that accident; however, the insurer's liability is subject to the limits provided by the policy or by law (whichever is higher), and in this case the appellant's liability shall in no event be less than Rs.9,50,000; the High Court's enhancement and allocation of liability to the insurer are upheld subject to the stated contractual/statutory caps and right of the insurer to recover any differential from…

Source excerpt

  • Fatal accident
  • Liability of insurance company
  • Trailer attached to tractor
  • Chain of causation
  • Enhancement of compensation
  • Statutory limits of insurer's liability
Read case analysis
Motor accident claims

SRI MALAKAPPA & ORS. versus THE IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED & ANR.

Court affirmed High Court finding that the accident was caused by rash and negligent driving; retained the Tribunal's income determination at â‚ą7,000 (no challenge) but accepted High Court enhancement to â‚ą8,000 was not allowed since no appeal, applied future prospects at 40% for a self-employed person aged 35 with multiplier 16, held husband was at least partially dependent so deduction for personal expenses fixed at 1/4th, awarded medical and other conventional heads and awarded loss of consortium to spouse and children, resulting in total compensation of â‚ą17,84,766.

Source excerpt

  • Death
  • Compensation
  • Multiplier
  • Deduction for personal expenses
  • Future prospects
  • Loss of consortium
Read case analysis
Motor vehicles act, 1988

NIDHI BHARGAVA & ORS. A1: NIDHI BHARGAVA A2: MANUJ BHARGAVA A3: ANUJ BHARGAVA versus NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. & ORS. R1: NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. THROUGH ITS REGIONAL MANAGER R2: K. L. BHARGAVA R3: ANIL KUMAR KUKREJA

The High Court erred in excluding the Income Tax Return for Assessment Year 2008-2009 solely because it was filed after the accident; the return relates to the financial year 1 April 2007 to 31 March 2008 and is admissible for assessing income for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act. The Tribunal's approach in relying on the relevant return (and its computation resulting in Rs.31,41,000) is restored, and judicial discretion as to averaging or choosing an assessment year lies with the Tribunal in light of the Act's beneficial purpose.

Source excerpt

  • Compensation
  • Income tax returns
  • Assessment year
  • Loss of dependency
  • Reduction of compensation
Read case analysis
Insurance

SOHOM SHIPPING PVT. LTD. versus M/S THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. & ANR.

The special condition that the 'voyage should commence & complete before monsoon sets in' could not be treated as a condition precedent to bar all liability because, given the voyage from Mumbai to Kolkata and the relevant DGS foul weather periods, compliance was impossible and strict enforcement would produce an absurdity depriving the assured of any remedy; the condition was non-material and was impliedly waived, and therefore the insurer was not entitled to repudiate the claim on that ground, warranting remand to the NCDRC to determine the insured sum payable.

Source excerpt

  • Uberrima fidei
  • Contra proferentem
  • Interpretation of insurance contract
  • Voyage insurance
  • Monsoon/foul weather condition
  • Special condition materiality
Read case analysis
Motor vehicles act

PARMINDER SINGH versus HONEY GOYAL AND OTHERS

The Court held that the appellant's monthly income was understated and should be assessed at â‚ą7,500 with 40% future prospects (â‚ą10,500 per month), applied a multiplier of 18 to calculate loss of income (â‚ą22,68,000) and enhanced awards under multiple heads (medical expenses, attendant charges, special diet, pain and suffering, physiotherapy, future medical expenses, loss of marriage prospects) resulting in total compensation of â‚ą36,84,000; the insurer was ordered to pay the enhanced amount with interest and to transfer it to the appellant's bank account within stipulated timeframes.

Source excerpt

  • Motor accident compensation
  • Loss of income
  • Future prospects
  • Attendant charges
  • Physiotherapy expenses
  • Pain and suffering
Read case analysis
Motor accident claim

SHIVALEELA AND OTHERS A1: SHIVALEELA A2: KUMARI KAVYA A3: KUMARI PURNIMA A4: KUMARI SHRAVYA A5: MASTER VEERESH A6: K. H. M. SHIVAMURTHAIAH versus THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. & OTHERS R1: THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. R2: SRI. GIRISH B. R3: DR. BASAVARAJA

On the evidence of multiple income sources (agriculture receipts, milk-vending entries, hiring/driving and a bank loan for agriculture) and considering the physical nature of the businesses and the age of the parents, the MACT and High Court erred in under-assessing the deceased's income; the Court fixed the deceased's monthly income at Rs.15,000, adjusted compensation using 40% future prospects, 1/5th deduction for personal expenses, multiplier 16, and awarded interest at 7.5% p.a., resulting in total compensation of Rs.35,66,600, thereby partly allowing the appeals.

Source excerpt

  • Monthly income
  • Loss of dependency
  • Future prospects
  • Multiplier
  • Personal and living expenses
  • Interest
Read case analysis
Motor vehicles

SACHIN YALLAPPA USULKAR & ORS. versus VIJAYATA & ORS.

On reappraisal of the evidence the Court found no substantive or direct evidence that Appellant No.2 (the minor) was driving the offending vehicle; eyewitness and other testimony indicated the father of Appellant No.2 was driving. Therefore the findings of the Tribunal and High Court insofar as they held the minor to be the driver were set aside; however, the award of compensation by the High Court was upheld and the insurer was held liable to pay the compensation and was not entitled to recover from the owner/driver in this case.

Source excerpt

  • Motor accident claim
  • Compensation
  • Driver liability
  • Pay and recover
  • Minor liability
Read case analysis
Insurance

SHRI BINOD KUMAR SINGH versus NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.

The National Permit was valid up to 13.10.2017 and, since the truck was registered in Bihar and caught fire within Bihar, the authorization fee (payable only when moving out of the State) was not required; repudiation of the claim on that ground was unfounded, entitling the appellant to the claim and interest at 9% per annum from the date of the complaint until payment.

Source excerpt

  • Insurance claim
  • National permit
  • Authorization fee
  • Repudiation of claim
  • Interest on award
Read case analysis
Motor accident

CHANDRAMANI NANDA versus SARAT CHANDRA SWAIN AND ANOTHER

The appeal was allowed and the High Court order modified because the Tribunal and High Court had erred in relying on older income tax returns instead of considering enhanced income evidence; the appellant's annual income was reasonably assessed at â‚ą2,00,000 with 40% future prospects (given age 32) and 100% functional disability was applied, together with additional awards for future attendant charges, loss of marriage prospects and increased pain and suffering, yielding total compensation of â‚ą52,31,000 with interest at 6%.

Source excerpt

  • Enhancement of compensation
  • Assessment of income
  • Future prospects
  • Functional disability
  • Attendant charges
  • Pain and suffering
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

India decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.