ADAMJEE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED vs MUHAMMAD RAMZAN Ss — 2025 CLD 1632 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

ADAMJEE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS MUHAMMAD RAMZAN Ss.118 & 124(2)---Insurance policy---Claim of policy holder---Recovery of insurance claim for loss of crops and livestock due to calamity/natural disaster---Respondent No.1 obtained a loan from a bank by mortgaging his agricultural land and the loan was compulsorily insured by the appellant company as per State Bank of Pakistan's directives---In September 2014, a severe flood devastated the area destroying crops, livestock, and house of respondent No.1---The area was officially declared a calamity-hit zone by the Government of Punjab---Respondent No.1 filed a claim for insurance compensation for loss of crops and livestock under the insurance policy---Insurance Tribunal granted respondent No.1 Rs. 131,000 for loss of Kharif 2014 crop; liquidated damages at 5% per annum from October 2014; and, directed the bank to adjust the said insurance claim amount in the account of borrower / respondent No.1---Being dissatisfied with the Tribunal's decision appellant (insurance company) instituted the present appeal---The controversy involved in the present matterwas centered upon the issue as to "whether the respondent No.1/policy holder was entitled to recover claim of loss of crops and livestock/sheep loan under insurance policy amounting to Rs.2,62,000/- along with liquidated damages on the basis of insurance policy"---Held: As per the agreement, in case of large scale catastrophe / calamity, appellant company would indemnify the insured up to 300% of the premium collected for Rabi and Kharif separately, based on 100% premium---The area where land of the respondent No.1 (policy holder) was located, was declared as calamity affected area, as such, the claim of the respondent No.1 (policy holder) was fully covered in the policy---Respondent No.1 (policy holder) availed loan facility from respondent No.2/bank by mortgaging his land---The loan was compulsorily insured with the appellant company---The area where the land of the respondent No.1 (policy holder) was situated, was badly affected by flood upon which it was declared calamity hit area---The meager amount of insurance claim of Rs.1,31,000/- of the insured / respondent No.1 (policy holder) was pending against the appellant company and it was legal right of the respondent No.1 (policy holder) to recover the same---No illegality or material irregularity, misreading and non-reading of evidence in the impugned judgment passed by the insurance tribunal was pointed out---Appeal being devoid of any merits was dismissed, in circumstance. Citation Name: 2025 CLD 1632 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case ADAMJEE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS MUHAMMAD RAMZAN Departments---Departments should not file appeals/ revisions as a matter of routine resulting into wastage of public time and money. Citation Name: 2025 CLD 1632 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case ADAMJEE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS MUHAMMAD RAMZAN art. 72---Insurance Ordinance (XXXIX of 2000), Ss.118 & 124(2)---Document---Proof---Producing document in the statement of counsel---Principle---Exceptions---Insurance claim---Recovery of claim of loss of crops and livestock---Objection raised by counsel for the appellant (insurance company) that the documents were produced by counsel of the respondent No.1 (policy holder) as such those documents could not be considered---Validity---The documents under question pertained to the record of the appellant company as well as that of respondent No.2 (bank) which had not been controverted by the appellant company through convincing evidence---Further, the other documents pertained to public record which were prepared, maintained and issued by the government and same had presumption of correctness, which official documents were per se admissible in evidence and even validity or veracity of said instruments were not under question in the present lis as such it did not have any effect on the case of the respondent No.1 (policy holder) and even the High Court had jurisdiction to take judicial notice of such public documents---Thus, the argument of counsel for the appellant being devoid of any force was repelled---No illegality or material irregularity, misreading and non-reading of evidence in the impugned judgment passed by the insurance tribunal was pointed out---appeal being devoid of any merits was dismissed, in circumstance. Citation Name: 2025 CLD 1632 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case ADAMJEE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED VS MUHAMMAD RAMZAN Departments---Departments should not file appeals/ revisions as a matter of routine resulting into wastage of public time and money.

ADAMJEE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED vs MUHAMMAD RAMZAN Ss — 2025 CLD 1632 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 CLD