| Case ID |
25820b13-1ff2-406e-91c9-05cdf1bd4bb5 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Insurance Petition No.273 of 2022 |
| Decision Date |
Mar 22, 2024 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Insurance Appellate Tribunal Punjab dismissed the insurance petition filed by WIRE MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY LTD. based on the principles of indemnity and limitation under the applicable laws. The court ruled that since the petitioner had already received compensation of $35,000 from the shipping company for the loss incurred, they were not entitled to further compensation under the marine insurance policy. The tribunal emphasized that the principles of indemnity dictate that no party should receive multiple compensations for the same loss, thereby upholding the doctrine of subrogation. The petition was also dismissed for being time-barred, as it was filed more than three years after the cause of action arose, violating Article 86(b) of the Limitation Act, 1908. |
| Summary |
In this case, WIRE MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY LTD. sought compensation from HABIB INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. under a marine insurance policy after suffering a loss related to a shipping incident. The tribunal, however, found that the petitioner had already been compensated by the shipping company for the same loss, which led to the dismissal of the petition on grounds of the principle of indemnity, which prohibits double compensation. Additionally, the petition was deemed time-barred as it was filed after the statutory limitation period. The court's decision emphasized the importance of adhering to the established principles of insurance law, particularly the doctrines of indemnity and subrogation. The case highlights key legal concepts within marine insurance, including the necessity for claimants to provide evidence of loss and the limitations imposed by statutory law on filing claims. |
| Court |
Insurance Appellate Tribunal Punjab
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
Justice (Retd.) Ali Akbar Qureshi,
Zafar Iqbal Tarar
|
| Lawyers |
Ali Rana for Petitioner,
Muhammd Ali Farooq for Respondent
|
| Petitioners |
WIRE MANUFACTURING INDUSTRY LTD. through Authorized Officer
|
| Respondents |
HABIB INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
|
| Citations |
2024 SLD 4288,
2024 CLD 975
|
| Other Citations |
Castellain v. Preston and others (1881-85) All ER Rep 493,
AIR 1997 SC 2871,
Mission National Insurance Company, Plaintiff v. Lowell M. Schulman, Schulman Investment Company, and United Organics Corporation, Defendants 659 F. Supp 270 (1986),
Burnand v. Rodocanachi (2) (7App Cas at p 330),
Robina Bibi v. State Life Insurance 2013 CLD 477,
2006 MLD 619,
2006 MLD 622,
PLD 2018 SC 828
|
| Laws Involved |
Marine Insurance Act, 2018,
Federal Ombudsmen Institutional Reform Act, 2013,
Insurance Ordinance, 2000
|
| Sections |
2(D),
18,
130,
122,
118
|