BEFORE THE A.P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
ATHYDERABAD.
F.A. 182/2006
Between:
Abdul Rasheed, S/o. Basha Saheb
Age: 30 years,R/o. Kamaraja Street
MGR Nagar, Chennai
Now R/o. D. No. V-22A
Appa Rao Thota, Madanapalle,
Rep. by its Power of Attorney Holder
Abdul Hyder Valli,
R/o. VII/272,Thyagaraja Street
Madanapalle.
United India Insurance Company Ltd.,
Rep. by its Branch Manager,
Gandhi Road, Madanpalle,
Chitoor Dist.
Counsel for the Appellant: Md.Counsel for the Resp:
QUORUM:
&
SMT. M. SHREESHA, MEMBER
THURSDAY, THIS THE FOURTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND EIGHT
Oral Order: (Per Hon’ble Justice D. Appa Rao, President)
it met with an accident Poosaripattai Junction Road
When he claimed the amount covered under the policy it was repudiated on the ground that the vehicle was
“14. An insurance company, however, is entitled to deny its liability to indemnify the owner of the vehicle on limited grounds as provided for
15.
18. “A contract of insurance is to be governed by the terms thereof, but a distinction must be borne in mind between a contract of insurance which has been entered into for the purpose of giving effect to the object and purport of the statute and one which provides for reimbursement of the liability of the owner of the vehicle strictly in terms thereof. In that limited sense, a contract of insurance entered into for the purpose of covering a third party risk would not be purely contractual. We may place on record that an ordinary contract of insurance does not have a statutory flavour. The Act merely imposes an obligation on the part of the insurance company to reimburse the claimant both in terms of the Act as also the Contract. So far as the liability of the insurance company which comes within the purview of Sections 146 and 147 is concerned, the same sub serves a