<?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>2017 (10) TMI 1663 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459562</link>
    <description>The SC allowed an appeal regarding rejection of an insurance claim due to delay in reporting theft. The Court held that insurance claims cannot be rejected solely on grounds of delay if the reason for delay is satisfactorily explained. The appellant provided cogent reasons for an 8-day delay in informing the insurer about the incident. The investigator verified the theft as genuine and the Corporate Claims Manager approved payment of Rs. 7,85,000. The Court emphasized that Consumer Protection Act deserves liberal construction and genuine claims should not be rejected when verified as correct. The appellant was awarded Rs. 50,000 compensation. Orders of National Commission, State Commission and District Forum were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Dec 2024 19:04:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=783433" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (10) TMI 1663 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459562</link>
      <description>The SC allowed an appeal regarding rejection of an insurance claim due to delay in reporting theft. The Court held that insurance claims cannot be rejected solely on grounds of delay if the reason for delay is satisfactorily explained. The appellant provided cogent reasons for an 8-day delay in informing the insurer about the incident. The investigator verified the theft as genuine and the Corporate Claims Manager approved payment of Rs. 7,85,000. The Court emphasized that Consumer Protection Act deserves liberal construction and genuine claims should not be rejected when verified as correct. The appellant was awarded Rs. 50,000 compensation. Orders of National Commission, State Commission and District Forum were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459562</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>