The Insurance Act, 1938
Insurance Act, 1938
Section 46-Claim of moneys covered by the insurance policies The policies were owned by the plaintiffs and the premiums were paid out of their accounts, and thus the plaintiffs being the beneficiaries of the policies are legally entitled to claim the moneys covered by the policies under section 46 of the Insurance Act. None of the points raised is merited one. These appeals are, dismissed without any order as to costs... Janata Insurance Company Ltd. VS M/s. Islam Steel Mills Ltd., [8 LM (AD) 298]
Section 46
The defendant contested the suits deny- ing the claim of the plaintiffs, inter alia, stating that there was no contract for in- surance policies between the plaintiffs and the defendant, and therefore, the de- fendant was not under any obligation to pay their claims covered by the policies. It was further asserted that the plaintiffs were not privy to the contracts of insur- ance and, therefore, they had no locus- standi to file the suits claiming moneys covered by the insurance policies. Janata Insurance Company Ltd vs. M/s. Islam Steel Mills (S.K. Sinha J) (Civil) 8 ADC 932
Section 47B
Mr. Tofailur Rahman has argued mainly that in this case it was the positive case of the insurer Sadharan Bima Corporation that the accident occurred for the reason that all the machineries of the factory of the ensured company was very old and purchased second hand in 1988 and that the insured company sup- pressing this fact entered into insurance contract illegally and fraudulently and in the circumstances the insurer cannot be made liable to satisfy the claim of the insured for the damage which was caused for the own fault and also fraud- ulent activity of the insured company. Mr. Tofailur Rahman has submitted also that after the accident the insurer caused survey of the insured factory by two agencies, namely, M/s. Asian Surveyor Ltd. and Mr. M. Alauddin, an expert and both of them submitted reports stating that all the machineries of the factory were very old and the reason of the ac- cident was the decrepit condition of these very old machineries. The learned advocate for the petitioner has submit- ted also that both the trial court and the High Court Division has failed to appre- ciate this evidence adduced from the in- surer company and consequently arrived at a wrong finding and decision. M/s. Sadharan Bima Corporation vs. United Fish Exports Limited (Nazmun Ara Sultana J) (Civil) 9 ADC 563
Section 47B
Sree Hari Sankar Nandi Majumder vs Sree
Promode Chandra Roy Choudhury and 47 DLR (AD) 97 between Sadharan Bima
Corporations Vs. Sanjib Kumar Das.
The word action or suit appearing in
clause 8(b) should not be interpreted as having identical meaning and the word
action would include legal notice served by the insured on the insurer. Chalna
Marine Products vs Bangladesh General Insurance Co. Ltd (Mainur Reza Chowdhury
J) (Civil) 2ADC 96
The Insurance Act, 1938
The appellant's company was not
accorded permission for registration to: carry on the business of general insurance....(2)
N.A. Choudhury vs. The Controller of Insurance (Amirul Kabir Chowdhury J)
(Civil) 5 ADC 588