Attachment and proclamation of sale of immovable property: limitation treated from financial year end; proclamation held within period, petition dismi...
Second Schedule attachment and validity of a post-notice mortgage: TRO cannot declare mortgage void ab initio; sale and appropriation allowed thereaft...
Limitation for final assessment under sections 144C and 153 treated jointly, resulting in quashing of timebarred assessment order and liberty to reviv...
Deductibility of settlement payments for securities law penalties and treatment of unexplained cash credits in share trading -- Tribunal upholds posit...
Threshold for allottee-initiated insolvency petitions in leasehold real estate upheld; petition admitted after possession letters deemed legally ineff...
Contravention of foreign exchange rules in crossborder diamond payments; appellate tribunal reduces one appellant's penalty for delay and proportional...
Issue was whether a fire insurance policy could be repudiated on the ground that burglary/theft preceded and allegedly caused the fire. The Court held that where loss is attributable to fire and there is no plea or proof of wilful act, foul play, or fraud by the insured, the cause of the fire is immaterial for coverage. Theft/burglary was not an exclusion under the specified peril of "Fire", and exclusions must be strictly construed; an exclusion under another clause could not defeat liability for an independently covered peril. The repudiation letter and the rejection order were set aside, and the matter was remitted for assessment of loss. - SC
Issue was whether a fire insurance policy could be repudiated on the ground that burglary/theft preceded and allegedly caused the fire. The Court held that where loss is attributable to fire and there is no plea or proof of wilful act, foul play, or fraud by the insured, the cause of the fire is immaterial for coverage. Theft/burglary was not an exclusion under the specified peril of "Fire", and exclusions must be strictly construed; an exclusion under another clause could not defeat liability for an independently covered peril. The repudiation letter and the rejection order were set aside, and the matter was remitted for assessment of loss. - SC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.