NEOLOBA SPECIALTY PRIVATE LIMITEDversusTHE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

                                                                                   918.OS.4726.2025.odt




                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                             ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
       Digitally
       signed by
                                         WRIT PETITION NO. 4726 OF 2025
       VINA
VINA   ARVIND
ARVIND KHADPE       Neoloba Specialty Private Limited                        ….Petitioner
KHADPE Date:
       2026.02.09
       15:26:48               Versus
       +0530

                    The New India Assurance
                    Company Limited & Anr.                                   ….Respondent
                                                    ----
                    Mr. Zal Andhyarujina, Senior Advocate, Ms. Akansha Agarwal a/w
                    Mr. Ankoosh Mehta, Advocate Sarah Navodita, Advocate Drishti
                    Mehta i/b. Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas, for the Petitioner.
                    Mr. Bomi Patel a/w. Mr. Sarthak Bahera and Ms. Sanjana Sapra i/b.
                    Tuli & Co., for the Respondent.
                                                    ----
                                              CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE &
                                                         ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.
                                               DATE : 06th FEBRUARY, 2026

                    P.C. :-

                    1.                  This matter was heard on 2nd February 2026, and we

                    have passed the following order :

                            1.      The learned Advocate for the Insurance Company
                                    would take instructions as to whether the
                                    documents tendered by the Petitioner would be
                                    considered and the claim would be decided on its
                                    merits.

                            2.      The Petitioner desires a verdict on the claim since
                                    a decision would atleast make the Petitioner
                                    aware as to what are the reasons, if the claim is to
                                    be rejected. Thereafter, it can avail of a statutory
                                    remedy as may be permissible in law.

                            3.      Stand over to 6th February, 2026 in the urgent
                                    supplementary board.



                    Sufiyan Syed - PA                      1 of 3
                                                              918.OS.4726.2025.odt




2.                  The learned Advocate representing the Insurance

Company submits, on instructions, that considering the factors

involved, the Insurance Company would decide the Petitioner’s

insurance claim within a period of twelve weeks.



3.                  The learned Senior Advocate representing the Petitioner

submits that twelve weeks would be too long a period. He prays that

the decision should be delivered within a shorter time frame.



4.                  In view of the above, we direct the Respondent to

consider the Petitioner’s claims in accordance with the terms of the

policy and to arrive at a decision within a period of seventy five

days from today. Needless to state, if the claims are accepted, the

consequences shall follow. If, for any reason, the claims are not

accepted, the Insurance Company would pass a reasoned order and

communicate the same to the Petitioner at her e-mail address within

twenty-four hours of arriving at the decision.



5.                  The Petitioner would be at liberty to avail of such

remedy as may be permissible in law for seeking redressal of its

grievance, if an adverse order is passed.


Sufiyan Syed - PA                       2 of 3
                                                                918.OS.4726.2025.odt




6.                  In view of the above statements recorded and the

directions issued, this Petition is disposed off.



7.                  Needless to state, all contentions of the parties are kept

open, as we have not dealt with the merits of the rival claims.




(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.)                         (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)




Sufiyan Syed - PA                        3 of 3