Find a Lawyer

E.F.U. GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY THROUGH REPRESENTATIVE versus STATE

Sections 516A, 517 and 561A Panel Code (XLV of 1860), Sections 324, 381A, 411 and 420 Crimes Against Property (Enforcement Hoodoo) Ordinance (VI of 1979), Section 17 (3) Vehicle Request The inquiry into the transfer of a superdriver order for a motor vehicle was stolen, its buyer filed an FIR and the police petitioner's company filed a subpoena with the Judicial Magistrate on the matter under which the applicant applied. Is an insurance company, after paying insurance money to its owner, they had a Luxury Standby to own a car. Syed's plea was rejected and criminal revision against the order of the Judicial Magistrate was also dismissed by an unidentified order, the insured applicant was insured for a period of one year with the applicant company. Failed to consider the fact that after receiving the payment of insurance money and obtaining subrogation, the applicant company was its legal owner Nothing was on the record to indicate that the applicant had information about the company insurance policy. The offense was used in the car with and kept on file \ Subrogation prima would be the owner of the company inquiring as the owner in this case in the absence of any competing claimant. Keeping the car in police custody indefinitely will not be of any use. Useful orders were set with the directive that the custody of the seized vehicle be handed over to an authorized representative of the applicant company on superdriver. \ r \ n \ r. n criminal advocate from Kunjah lawyer