Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR2009KAR698; 2009(2)KarLJ273; 2009(1)AIRKarR21
ORDERAjit J. Gunjal, J.1. The petitioner at the relevant point of time was working as Senior Branch Manager in the cadre of Class-I Officer with the first respondent, Life Insurance Corporation of India (for short, 'the Corporation'). The case made out by the petitioner is that he voluntarily retired from service on 07.11.1991 due to some domestic and personal reasons. This petition is filed for the relief to declare that the age of the officer to be 55 years at the time of voluntary retirement under Regulation 19(2)(a) to be ultra vires and violative of Articles 14, 16(1), 21, 39(d) and 41 of the Constitution of India and further declare the respondent Corporation to grant commutation amount of the pension and to pay pension from the date of his retirement on 01.11.1993 with all consequential benefits.2. The facts germane for the disposal of this case can be stated in brief as follows:The petitioner, as stated earlier, was a Class-I Officer, Due to some domestic problems, he proposes ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2008SC2361; 2008(5)ALLMR(SC)983; 2008(3)AWC3091(SC); III(2008)BC247; 2008(56)BLJR2070; [2008]143CompCas711(SC); (2008)5MLJ1097(SC); (2008)151PLR662; 2008(8)SCALE327; 2008AIRSCW3903; AIR2008SC2360; 2008(8)SCC148
A.K. Mathur, J.1. Leave granted.2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 17.1.2006 passed by the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court whereby the Division Bench has held that since the property of the respondent No. 1 has been seized under the Special Courts (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act,1992 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act of 1992), the Debts Recovery Tribunal had no jurisdiction to grant a declaration that the properties of a notified person stand charged and the certificate against such properties cannot be executed by the Recovery Officer under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act of 1993) and the financial institution would have to move the Special Court in respect of the property attached.3. Brief facts which are necessary for disposal of this appeal are that the respondent No. 1 was declared as a notified party on 6.10.2001. Pursuant to the said no...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : III(2008)BC330(SC); 2008(4)BomCR707; [2008]114CompCas178(SC); (2008)3CompLJ91(SC); [2008]84SCL355(SC); 2008AIRSCW4651; AIR2008SC2805; 2008(7)SCC619; 2008(4)Supreme553; 2008(4)KCCRSN315
..... court in an application presented to it as a court of first instance declares liability to pay a debt, the jurisdiction exercised is original and civil and if the exercise of that jurisdiction does not depend upon any preliminary step invoking exercise of discretion of the high court, the jurisdiction is ordinary. 25. in damji valli shah v. life insurance corporation of india : [1965]3scr665 , the question which arose for consideration was as to whether a similar provision made in the life insurance corporation act, 1956 shall bar the jurisdiction of the company court in terms of section 446(1) of the companies act. referring to section 41 of the life insurance corporation act, 1956 it was stated ..... have jurisdiction as regards sale of its assets till an order of winding up is passed by a company court. 42. apart from the fact that sub-section (4) of section 20 contains a non obstante clause and, thus, it shall prevail over the provisions contained in sub-section (2). the said act is also a latter statute. 43. the provisions of sica would prevail over the provisions of the companies act. section 20 of sica relates to winding up of the sick industrial company. before bifr or aaifr, as the case may be, makes a recommendation for winding up of the company .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Reported in : 2008(4)MPHT123
ORDERA.K. Shrivastava, J.1. The land lady, being dissatisfied by the impugned order dated 19/6/2003 passed by Rent Controlling Authority, Shahdol in case No. 3/A 90/92-93 dismissing her application of eviction against the respondent, has filed this revision application under Section 23-A of M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act').2. The present applicant, being landlord of special category as defined under Section 23-J of Chapter III-A of the Act, filed an application before Rent Controlling Authority for eviction of respondent from the suit accommodation which is non-residential on the ground of her bona fide need as envisaged under Section 23-A(b) of the Act.3. The application for eviction was filed by applicant-Shyama Bai against her tenant Shobhraj Ahuja who died during the pendency of the application before the Rent Controlling Authority and present respondent-Murlidhar was brought on record as his legal representative.4. The pleadings of the applicant in her app...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2008ACJ1040; AIR2008SC1310; 2008(2)ALLMR(SC)784; 2008(1)AWC769(SC); 2008BusLR446(SC); I(2008)CPJ81(SC); (2008)3GLR2304(SC); JT2008(2)SC250; 2008(3)MhLj584; (2008)2MLJ1034(S); 2008AIRSCW1404; 2008(3)LH(SC)1956; 2008(2)ICC581
..... on 28.3.1995 and the cheque was issued much beyond the grace period. additionally, section 64vb does not apply to the appellant. in this context section 43 of the life insurance corporation act, 1956 (in short the 'act') has relevance. reference is also made to condition 2 of the policy.6. in reply learned counsel for the claimant submitted that it is not condition 2 of the policy which is applicable, but condition no. 3 which is applicable. it is stated that no adverse inference can be drawn because the insured had not signed the cheque and merely because the cheque was received after the death ..... time of the assured. in the instant case the cheque was admittedly received after the death of the assured. further the revival takes effect only after the same is approved by the corporation and is specifically communicated to the life insured. in the present case this is not the situation.further section 43 of the act reads as follows:43. application of the insurance act.(1) the following section of the insurance act shall, so far as may be, apply to the corporation as they apply to any other insurer, namely:-sections 2, 2b, 3, 18, 26, 33, 38, 39, 31, 45, 46, 47a, 50, 51, 52, 110a, 110b, 110c, 119, 121, 122 and 123.(2) the central .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2007SC1579; 2007(2)ARBLR82(SC); 2007(3)AWC2332(SC); [2007(3)JCR1(SC)]; JT2007(6)SC156; 2007(5)SCALE700
C.K. Thakker, J.1. Present appeals are filed against the judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh on April 12, 1999 in Writ Appeal M.P. No. 1001 of 1995 and W.A.S.R. No. 38345 of 1995 by which it confirmed the order passed by the learned Single Judge on January 27, 1995 in Writ Petition No.12016 of 1993 directing the appellant herein to comply with the award passed by an Arbitrator appointed under the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act of 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The facts giving rise to the present appeals are that the respondents-claimants were the owners of the land bearing Survey No 83 admeasuring 12 acres and 5 gunthas and Survey No. 86/2 admeasuring 12 acres and 30 guntas, situated at Devarayamzal Village, Medchal Mandal, Rangareddy District of Andhra Pradesh. The land was initially requisitioned for defence purpose, i.e. for the purpose of extension of rifle range of Hakimpet Airfield, EMC cen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2007(3)ALLMR462; 2007(3)BomCR98; (2007)109BOMLR559; [2007]79SCL583(Bom)
..... life insurance business given to the corporation, ceased from the commencement of the insurance regulatory and development authority act, 1999, hereinafter known as insurance regulatory act. the corporation which was carrying on life insurance business in accordance with the provisions of the insurance act, 1938, ceased to have monopoly on life insurance business. consequent thereupon various private companies are in the business of issuing life insurance policies. under section 43 of the life insurance act, only certain provisions were made applicable. there was power conferred to apply other sections as set out therein. section 30a as introduced by an amendment, however provides, that the provisions of the insurance act are applicable for carrying on business of life insurance. an argument has been advanced as to the effect of section 30a on section 43, to the extent the provisions of the insurance act are applicable to the corporation ..... is the statutory corporation established under section 3 of the life insurance corporation act, 1956 which hereinafter shall be referred to as the life insurance act. the respondent no. 2 is the statutory authority established under section 3 of the insurance regulatory & development authority act, 1999 which hereinafter shall be referred to as irda. according to the petitioners, their business involves acquiring life insurance policies from the policy holders by paying value consideration to the policy holder. an insurance policy would .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : II(2007)BC542(SC); JT2007(8)SC249; 2007(3)SCALE377
Altamas Kabir, J.1. All these appeals have been filed by the Syndicate Bank against the common judgment passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh on 6thAugust, 2003, dismissing the several writ petitions filed by the Bank. 2. Briefly stated the facts leading to the filing of the Special Leave Petitions are that M/s. United Auto Tractors Private Limited, (for short 'the Company') one of the common respondents in all these appeals, applied to the Government of Andhra Pradesh for allotment of 100 acres of land in the industrial area for setting up of an industry for manufacturing agricultural tractors and implements. The Government of Andhra Pradesh by its letter dated 18thJuly, 1972 written by the Director of Industries allotted 51 acres of land in Nacharam Industrial Development Area, Hyderabad, to the company for setting up of the said industry. An Agreement was entered into on 3rd August, 1972 between the Government of Andhra Pradesh and the Company which requir...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 2007ACJ1441
Pratap Kumar Ray, J.1. Leave is granted to the appellant to take the point that the brother and sister of the victim since are not the legal heir due to existence of mother of victim as sole legal heir, accordingly, insurance company had no liability to pay the compensation to them.2. Heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties.3. A short question involved in this appeal as to whether in the application under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, the brother and sister of the victim guided as per Hindu Succession Act, 1956, could be entitled to be the claimants due to existence of sole legal heir mother of victim, in view of the statutory provision as stipulated under Section 163-A of the said Act that the claim application should be filed by the 'legal heirs' of the victim and further on the point as to whether the learned Tribunal below was wrong to identify the multiplier to quantify compensation amount on the basis of the age of the victim. The answer of the aforesaid ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : 2008(1)CHN807
..... funds which is a substantial amount. he submitted that under the trust in the event of a member and/or dependant granted the pension by purchase of assurance or annuity policy or policies of contract on the life insurance corporation of india. families of members are only entitled to pension in the event of a member dying before retirement. accordingly, once pension is provided by purchase of annuity from the fund to a pensioner, he ..... 23rd december, 2004 passed by the hon'ble first court whereby his lordship while disposing of the application under section 34 of the trusts act, 1882 (hereinafter referred to as the said act) was pleased to hold that the application under section 34 of the said act is maintainable. his lordship further held that the trust has to remain for payment of pension not only to ..... neither falls within the category mentioned in order 41 of the civil procedure code nor the same can be considered as a decree and as such does not fall under order 43 of the civil procedure code.5. the said order does not adjudicate right of any party nor determines any issue, therefore, cannot be termed as 'judgment' within the meaning ..... , comes to an end, or it can be declared as a resulting trust of the funds as suggested by mr. sarkar in the given facts.40. in our opinion, the decisions reported in air 1956 calcutta 281 (supra) and air 1959 sc 1049 (supra) cannot be a help to mr. sarkar in the facts and circumstances of this case.41. after considering the submissions made before .....
Tag this Judgment!