Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: life insurance corporation act 1956 section 43 application of the insurance act Sorted by: recent Court: allahabad Year: 1962 Page 1 of about 1 results (0.079 seconds)

Sep 04 1962 (HC)

Bhagwati Prasad Bajoria and ors. Vs. British India Corporation Ltd. an ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Sep-04-1962

Reported in : AIR1964All75

Oak, J. 1. I agree with my learned brother that the application should be allowed. I would like to add a few words on the question of maintainability of the application.2. Mr. S.N. Kakkar appearing for Sri L.N. Dalmia, objector contended that, the application under Section 151, C. P. C. is not maintainable. Mr. Kakkar advanced two reasons in support of his contention. He argued that the present applicants were not parties in Special Appeal No. 299 of 1961. Secondly, the Court has no power to alter its judgment, dated 14-2-1962.3. Mr. Kakkar relied upon Order XX, Rule 3, C. P. C. Order XX, Rule 3, C. P. C. states :'The judgment shall be dated and signed by the Judge in open Court at the time of pronouncing it and, when once signed, shall not afterwards be altered or added to, save as provided by Section 152, or on review.'4. In Sajjadi Begam v. Dilawar Husain, AIR 1915 All 98 a Court made a decree in plaintiff's favour conditional upon his paying an extra court-fee within a certain time...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 16 1962 (HC)

Dominion of India Vs. Central Aerating Gas Company

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Apr-16-1962

Reported in : AIR1964All243

S.N. Dwivedi, J. 1. In this appeal against a decree awarding Rs. 3,300/- to the plaintiff as damages for causing wrongful destruction of the plaintiffs truck three questions have been raised by Sri Seth, learned counsel for the appellant: firstly, the suit is barred by limitation; secondly, the plaintiff is entitled, if at all, to get only Rs. 2,100//-; and thirdly, the plaintiff, being guilty of contributory negligence, is not entitled to any damages. 2. I propose to take up the question of limitation first. On that question the material facts, which cannot now be disputed, are that on July 19, 1946, at 3 a.m. the plaintiffs truck, laden with gas cylinders, reached the level Crossing No. 87, G. T. Road, Saharanpur; the gate of the level crossing was then closed for letting 3 U. P Frontier Mail pass from Saharanpur to Ambala; then the said train passed but the gate remained still closed; a few minutes thereafter a petrol driven lorry arrived at the scene and stood behind the plaintiff'...

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //