<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1960 (5) TMI 25 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152908</link>
    <description>An insurer that has closed all classes of insurance business remains subject to the Insurance Act, 1938 where liabilities in India in respect of that business are still unsatisfied or otherwise unprovided for. The statutory definition of &quot;insurer&quot; yields to context, and section 2D was read broadly to continue the Act&#039;s application until outstanding and probable claims are satisfied or properly provided for. A security deposit under section 7 does not by itself amount to such provision, because it is not an automatic fund available to discharge all liabilities. Accordingly, investigation under section 33 could still be ordered and the insurer remained within the Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 May 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Oct 2016 16:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=169945" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1960 (5) TMI 25 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152908</link>
      <description>An insurer that has closed all classes of insurance business remains subject to the Insurance Act, 1938 where liabilities in India in respect of that business are still unsatisfied or otherwise unprovided for. The statutory definition of &quot;insurer&quot; yields to context, and section 2D was read broadly to continue the Act&#039;s application until outstanding and probable claims are satisfied or properly provided for. A security deposit under section 7 does not by itself amount to such provision, because it is not an automatic fund available to discharge all liabilities. Accordingly, investigation under section 33 could still be ordered and the insurer remained within the Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 May 1960 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152908</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>