Registration of FIR not sine qua non for processing life insurance policy claim in cases of accidental fall deaths

Last updated: 29 December 2022
Quick Summary
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has ruled that a First Information Report (FIR) is not always necessary when processing a life insurance claim for death by accidental fall. In a case where the insured died from injuries sustained after falling from their veranda, the insurance company, LIC, had repudiated the claim citing the lack of an FIR. However, the court upheld the Consumer Commission's decision, stating that for accidents where no one can be held responsible, like a fall, an FIR is not a prerequisite for claim processing, especially when other evidence confirms the accidental nature of the death.

Court :
J&K And Ladakh High Court

Brief :
It recently upheld a Consumer Commission order wherein it was held that in cases where the death of the insured has occurred due to injuries suffered from a fall, the registration of FIR may not be required for processing the life insurance claim.

Citation :
FAO(CP) NO.1/2021 CM NO. 813/2021

Daily Limit Reached

You have reached your daily limit of 2 Free Judgements

Subscribe to CCI PRO for unlimited access

Why Upgrade to CCI PRO?
  • No Ads
  • WhatsApp Broadcasts
  • Daily E-Newsletter
  • Unlimited Judgements 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.

 
Comments


Recent Judgments :

  1. Forest Development Tax Demand, Collection and Refund Subject to Final Outcome of Pending Cases
  2. SC : Extended Limitation Cannot Be Invoked Where Department Was Aware of Valuation Facts
  3. SC : Selling Shares While in Possession of UPSI Constitutes Insider Trading Even if No Profit Is Made
  4. SC : Laser Imagers Compatible with Machines Under Different Tariff Headings Classifiable Under CTH 9033
  5. Education Consultancy Services to Foreign Universities Not Intermediary Services; Refund of IGST on Export of Services Allowed
  6. Penalty Cannot Be Confirmed Beyond What is Specified in Statutory Form GST DRC-01
  7. Non-Supply of Field Visit Report Vitiates Rejection of Revocation Application
  8. Alternative Remedy before GSTAT to be Exhausted Despite Allegation that Adjudication Travelled Beyond SCN
  9. ITAT Jodhpur: AO Allows ₹2.61 Crore Deduction under Sections 54EC and 54F; Assessee's Appeal Dismissed as Infructuous
  10. CESTAT Revokes Suspension of Customs Broker Licence for Non-Compliance with Mandatory 15-Day Hearing Requirement

View More Judgments »


Trending Online Classes

view all classess

CCI Pro
Meet our CAclubindia PRO Members
Pro Member CA DamodaramCA DamodaramPro Member Ritesh PanpaliyaRitesh PanpaliyaPro Member PARAS CHHAJEDPARAS CHHAJEDPro Member CA Rahul PatwardhanCA Rahul PatwardhanPro Member Nandkishore VishwakarmaNandkishore Vishwakarma
Subscribe to Pro
Join an elite circle of professionals

Browse by Category