Dismissed

Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Company v. Pushpa Devi and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Aug 2014FAO/5431/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This appeal challenged the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal award regarding death compensation. The insurer argued the accident occurred before the cover note was issued. The court relied on the owner's cheque and acknowledgment to establish coverage commenced accident date and dismissed the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Amount of ₹25,000 deposited by the appellant was remitted to the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal for disbursement to the claimants.

Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Company Vs Pushpa… — Motor Accident Claims | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

FAO-5431- 2014 (O&M)

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

FAO-5431- 2014 (O&M) Date of Decision: August 01, 2014

¶5

HDFC Ergo General Insurance Co.Ltd.

¶6

.....Appellant

¶7

¶8

Pushpa Devi and others

¶9

......Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI

¶11

Present: Mr.Vishal Aggarwal, Advocate for the appellant.

¶12

NARESH KUMAR SANGHI, J.

¶13

Challenge in this appeal filed by HDFC Ergo General Insurance Company Limited is to the award, dated 02.05.2014, passed by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Palwal, whereby compensation to the tune of `9,32,600/- was awarded to the claimants on account of death of Parash Ram.

¶14

The learned counsel representing the appellantInsurance Company has raised the sole argument that the accident had taken place on 07.08.2012 whereas the cover note was issued on 20.08.2012, therefore, the Insurance company was not liable to indemnify the owner of the vehicle.

¶15

Meenu 2014.08.02 11:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh

¶16

¶17

FAO-5431- 2014 (O&M)

¶18

During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the appellant fairly conceded that the owner of the vehicle had issued a cheque in favour of the appellant on 05.08.2012 for getting his vehicle insured and an acknowledgment was issued in token thereof wherein it was mentioned that the insurance would commence from 00 hrs. on 05.08.2012 and would expire on 04.08.2013.

¶19

In view of the above, there is no merit in the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that the vehicle was not insured on 07.08.2012, i.e. the date of accident.

¶20

Dismissed.

¶21

The amount of `25,000/- deposited by the appellant before this Court be remitted to the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Palwal, for disbursement to the claimants in accordance with law.

¶22

August 01, 2014 meenu

¶23

(NARESH KUMAR SANGHI) JUDGE

¶24

Meenu 2014.08.02 11:38 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document chandigarh

Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Company v. Pushpa Devi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Ergo General Insurance Company v. Pushpa Devi and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pritam Singh Vs State of Punjab and Others

Baljinder Singh Bhullar @ Balwinder Singh Bhullar Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Jagtar Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Paramjit Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Sahil Vs State of Punjab

Avtar Singh Vs State of Punjab