FCS Deepak Pratap Singh
Quick Summary
GURSHINDER SINGH Vs. SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ANR.IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA/ CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTIONCIVIL APPEAL No.653 OF 2020 THE ISSUE As to whether the delay in informing the occurrence of the theft of the vehicle to the insurance company, though the FIR was registered imme
Daily Limit Reached
You have reached your daily limit of 2 Free Articles
Subscribe to CCI PRO for unlimited access
Why Upgrade to CCI PRO?
- No Ads
- WhatsApp Broadcasts
- Daily E-Newsletter
- Unlimited Articles Access
BEST VALUE
2 YEAR PLAN
3,499
(Inclusive of GST)
1 YEAR PLAN
1,999
(Inclusive of GST)
View all CCI PRO benfits
Already a PRO member? Login here for an ad-free experience.
FAQ :
No, not necessarily. The Supreme Court has ruled that a delay in informing the insurance company about a theft does not automatically disentitle a claimant, provided the delay is reasonably explained and the claim is otherwise genuine.
The Supreme Court has stated that the word 'immediately' in insurance policy terms should not be interpreted in a narrow, technical way that prevents genuine claims from being paid, especially when the delay in intimation is explained.
Rejecting genuine insurance claims on purely technical grounds, such as a slight delay in intimation, can lead to a loss of confidence among policyholders in the insurance industry.
The case concerned whether a delay in informing the insurance company about a vehicle's theft, despite an immediate FIR, would prevent the claimant from receiving their insurance money.
The Supreme Court ruled in favour of the claimant, stating that the delay in intimation, when explained, should not be a reason to repudiate a genuine claim.
CAclubindia
