Via PTI
MUMBAI: Remarriage of a widow can’t be a explanation why to disclaim repayment to her below the Motor Cars Act for the demise of her husband in a street coincidence, the Bombay Prime Court docket has stated whilst pushing aside an insurance coverage corporate’s petition.
Iffco Tokio Normal Insurance coverage Corporate had filed the petition within the prime courtroom, difficult the order of a Motor Injuries Declare Tribunal (MACT), which had directed the corporate to pay repayment to the girl, whose husband was once killed in a street coincidence in 2010.
A single-judge bench of Justice S G Dige on March 3 made up our minds the attraction of the insurance coverage corporate. Its detailed order was once made to be had not too long ago.
The suggest for the company had submitted that because the claimant, the spouse of deceased Ganesh, remarried after his demise, she isn’t entitled to get repayment.
The courtroom, on the other hand, held that one can’t be expecting that for purchasing repayment for the demise of her husband, she has to stay a widow for lifestyles or until she will get the payout.
The courtroom famous that it seems that from the file that on the time of the demise of her husband, the girl was once 19 years outdated.
Making an allowance for her age and the truth that she was once the spouse of the deceased on the time of the coincidence is enough floor for her to get repayment, it stated.
“Additionally, after the demise of a husband, remarriage can’t be a taboo to get repayment,” the courtroom held.
The lady’s husband had met with an coincidence in Would possibly 2010 when he was once on a bike as a pillion rider.
When the motorbike was once crossing the Mumbai-Pune freeway and heading in opposition to Kamshet, an autorickshaw rammed into the two-wheeler, resulting in Ganesh’s demise.
The company had contended that it cannot be held at risk of pay the repayment because the autorickshaw was once most effective accepted to ply inside of Thane district.
On the other hand, the choose stated, “I don’t to find any infirmity in it. In my opinion, the appellants have now not tested any witness to turn out that taking the offending rickshaw out of doors the jurisdiction of Thane district was once a breach of the phrases of allow, and it quantities to breach of phrases and prerequisites of insurance plans.”
“Therefore, I don’t see advantage within the rivalry of discovered suggest for appellant that there was once breach of phrases and prerequisites of insurance plans,” Justice Dige stated whilst pushing aside the attraction.
MUMBAI: Remarriage of a widow can’t be a explanation why to disclaim repayment to her below the Motor Cars Act for the demise of her husband in a street coincidence, the Bombay Prime Court docket has stated whilst pushing aside an insurance coverage corporate’s petition.
Iffco Tokio Normal Insurance coverage Corporate had filed the petition within the prime courtroom, difficult the order of a Motor Injuries Declare Tribunal (MACT), which had directed the corporate to pay repayment to the girl, whose husband was once killed in a street coincidence in 2010.
A single-judge bench of Justice S G Dige on March 3 made up our minds the attraction of the insurance coverage corporate. Its detailed order was once made to be had not too long ago.googletag.cmd.push(serve as() googletag.show(‘div-gpt-ad-8052921-2’); );
The suggest for the company had submitted that because the claimant, the spouse of deceased Ganesh, remarried after his demise, she isn’t entitled to get repayment.
The courtroom, on the other hand, held that one can’t be expecting that for purchasing repayment for the demise of her husband, she has to stay a widow for lifestyles or until she will get the payout.
The courtroom famous that it seems that from the file that on the time of the demise of her husband, the girl was once 19 years outdated.
Making an allowance for her age and the truth that she was once the spouse of the deceased on the time of the coincidence is enough floor for her to get repayment, it stated.
“Additionally, after the demise of a husband, remarriage can’t be a taboo to get repayment,” the courtroom held.
The lady’s husband had met with an coincidence in Would possibly 2010 when he was once on a bike as a pillion rider.
When the motorbike was once crossing the Mumbai-Pune freeway and heading in opposition to Kamshet, an autorickshaw rammed into the two-wheeler, resulting in Ganesh’s demise.
The company had contended that it cannot be held at risk of pay the repayment because the autorickshaw was once most effective accepted to ply inside of Thane district.
On the other hand, the choose stated, “I don’t to find any infirmity in it. In my opinion, the appellants have now not tested any witness to turn out that taking the offending rickshaw out of doors the jurisdiction of Thane district was once a breach of the phrases of allow, and it quantities to breach of phrases and prerequisites of insurance plans.”
“Therefore, I don’t see advantage within the rivalry of discovered suggest for appellant that there was once breach of phrases and prerequisites of insurance plans,” Justice Dige stated whilst pushing aside the attraction.