Disposed

Savita v. Iffco Tokio General Insurance

Delhi HC12 Aug 2025CM(M)/415/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju disposed of a writ petition under Article 227 challenging the dismissal of an application by an insurance claimant to release the remaining award amount for property purchase, directing the Tribunal to examine forthcoming documents proving bona fides before passing suitable orders.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file an appropriate application before the Tribunal with all requisite documents evidencing bona fides for property purchase; Tribunal to examine and pass orders.

Savita Vs Iffco Tokio General Insurance — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~34

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 12.08.2025

¶4

- CM(M) 415/2025 SAVITA .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Rijul Taneja, Ms. Henna Narula and Mr. Nimrit Bhalla, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE .....Respondent Through: None.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU

¶10

TARA VITASTA GANJU, J.: (Oral)

¶11

CM Appl. 12542/2025 [Exemption from filing Trial Court record]

¶12

The Registry is directed to place on record the digital copy of the Trial Court Record duly paginated and book-marked in accordance with the rules of the High Court.

¶13

The Application stands disposed of.

¶14

CM Appl. 21514/2025 [Seeking early hearing]

¶15

The present Application has become infructuous and is accordingly dismissed.

¶16

CM(M) 415/2025

¶17

The present Petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 impugning the order dated 15.01.2025 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, MACT, District North, Rohini Courts, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “Impugned Order”]. By the Impugned Order, the Application filed by the Petitioner for release of the remaining award

¶18

Signature Not Verified

¶19

Digitally Signed By:RAHUL Signing Da te:1 3.08.2025 10:07:15

¶20

CM(M) 415/2025 Page 1 of 3

¶21

amount was dismissed.

¶22

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the request of the Petitioner to release a sum of Rs. 17,13,220/- in pursuance of an agreement to sell dated 23.12.2024 executed by the Petitioner has not been released.

¶23

5.1 Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the learned Tribunal had passed an award dated 03.05.2023 [hereinafter referred to as “Impugned Award”] in favour of the Petitioner by which an amount in the sum of Rs. 20.69 lakhs was awarded to the Petitioner No.1. By the Impugned Award, various amounts were awarded to the Claimants therein. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that he represented Petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 before the learned Tribunal.

¶24

5.2 Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the amounts that were awarded to Petitioner No. 1 was Rs. 20.69 lakhs and Rs. 12 lakhs to the Petitioner No. 2 along with proportionate interest. It is the contention of the Petitioner that of the Rs. 20.69 lakhs awarded, a sum of Rs. 5,73,000/- have already been released to the Petitioner and that no amounts have been released in favour of the minor son.

¶25

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that after the death of the deceased, the Petitioner has been residing with her father and brothers in their house. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has negotiated to purchase a property at property located at Tashil Jewar Gautam Budh Nagar U.P. for her residence and that of son with a view to secure their future. It is contended that the Petitioner has executed an agreement to sale dated 23.12.2024 [hereinafter referred to as “Agreement”].

¶26

Signature Not Verified

¶27

Digitally Signed By:RAHUL Signing Da te:1 3.08.2025 10:07:15

¶28

CM(M) 415/2025 Page 2 of 3

¶29

6.1 Learned Counsel for the Petitioner further submits that in pursuance thereof, an Application was filed by Petitioner No.1 for release of the awarded amount in one lumpsum to make payment for the purchase of the property, however, by the Impugned Order, the Application has been dismissed. He submits that the Petitioner has already paid the advance amount under the Agreement.

¶30

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner fairly concedes that although the Agreement was placed on record, no other documents were placed on record before the learned Tribunal. He further submits, on instructions, that the receipts and other documents evidencing payments made by the Petitioner to the seller of the property are available with him and that he will file the same before the learned Tribunal to show his bona fides along with any other document required.

¶31

7.1 Learned Counsel for the Petitioner further submits, on instructions, that the Petitioner only seeks the disbursal of the balance amount that was awarded to her and that no amounts shall be withdrawn from the account of her son.

¶32

Accordingly, the Petition is disposed of with a direction that the Petitioner shall file an appropriate Application and appear before the learned Tribunal with all requisite documents evidencing his bona fides for purchase of the property for her residence. The learned Tribunal shall examine the documents and pass appropriate orders.

¶33

The parties will act based on the digitally signed copy of the order.

¶34

TARA VITASTA GANJU, J

¶35

AUGUST 12, 2025/r

¶36

Signature Not Verified

¶37

Digitally Signed By:RAHUL Signing Da te:1 3.08.2025 10:07:15

¶38

CM(M) 415/2025 Page 3 of 3

Savita v. Iffco Tokio General Insurance

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Savita v. Iffco Tokio General Insurance

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Neena Khanna Vs Wenger & Co. & Ors.

Mohd Rafat Khan Vs Ms Najma Raza

Rajan Vs Priyanka

Prabhat Deswal Vs Ankita Khokhar Deswal

Santosh Singh Vs Satvinder Kaur

Sachin Malhotra Vs Yogita Malhotra

Rajesh Bhutani & Ors. Vs Kamla

Pranav Ansal & Anr. Vs Mahinder Sharma & Anr.

Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (Upsrtc) Vs Smt Sarvesh & Ors.

Virender Kumar Chopra Vs Raj Kumar Prop

A2Z Infraservices Limited Vs Assistant Labour Commissioner & Ors.

Kings Dorian Exports Vs Irfan

M/S Elementto Lifestyles Vs Mr. Deepak Singh Bora

M/S King Dorian Exports Vs Dudh Naat