ORIGINAL JURISDICTION - Orissa High Court

More documents

Recommendations

Info

INDIAN LAW REPORTS, CUTTACK SERIES [2010] (ii) suspending him from practice for a specified period; or (iii) letting him off with a warning, according to the nature and gravity of the misconduct of the notary proved.” 11. In view of the fact that the State Government had already exercised its power under Section 13(12) (b) (iii) of the Rules, letting off the petitioner with a warning, considering the nature and gravity of the misconduct proved against him, the same could not have been the basis for refusing renewal of his Notarial Certificate of Practice, inasmuch as, the petitioner could not have been punished twice for the same offence. Moreover, the said provision contained in Section 13 of the Rules does not provide for refusal of renewal of a Notarial Certificate of Practice on the ground of misconduct, by way of punishment. 12. Applying the principles of law as discussed above to the facts of the present case, the conclusion is irresistible that the impugned decision of the State Government as communicated to the petitioner vide letter dated 1.5.2006 (Annexure-8), refusing to renew his Notarial Certificate of Practice is not proper and justified and the same is accordingly quashed. The opposite parties are directed to grant necessary renewal to the petitioner, as per the provision of the Rules, within four weeks hence. Writ Petition is accordingly allowed. 32
2010 ( I ) ILR-CUT- 289 B.P.DAS,J & S.C.PARIJA,J. ANUPAMA BEHERA & ORS. -V-D.M.,L.I.C. OF INDIA,CUTTACK & ANR.* JANUARY 29,2010. INSURANCE ACT, 1938 (ACT NO.4 OF 1938) – SEC.45. Repudiation of claim – Test to determine – If the facts not disclosed in the proposal form has any bearing on the risk undertaken by the insurer then the same can be construed as a material fact for repudiation. In the present case the insured died on 18.06.2004 due to heart failure – No material that the insured suffered from any serious disease affecting his life expectancy prior to his taking the policies – The medical book maintained by the employer of the insured disclosed that he had complained of lower back pain in the year 1999 – Merely because the insured had not disclosed in the proposal form some minor ailments which had no material bearing on the risk undertaken by the L.I.C., the same can not be construed as fraudulent suppression of material facts so as to authorise the L.I.C. to repudiate its liability under the contract of Insurance. Held, repudiation of Insurance Policies and rejection of claim by the L.I.C. not justified. (Para 15,16,17) Case laws Referred to:- 1.AIR 1962 SC 814 : ( Mithoolal Nayak -V- Life Insurance Corporation of India). 2.AIR 1960 Calcutta 696 : (Rohini Nandan Goswami -V-Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corporation Ltd.). 3.AIR 1961 Punjab 253 : (Lakshmi Insurance Co.Ltd.-V-Bibi Padma Wati). 4.AIR 1968 Madras 324 : (Life Insurance Corporation of India -V-Janaki Ammal). 5.AIR 2001 SC 549 : (Life Insurance Corporation of India & Ors.-V-Smt.Asha Goel & Anr 6.AIR 2008 SC 424 : (P.J.Chacko & Anr.-V-Chairman, Life Insurance Corporation of India & Ors.) For Petitioners- M/s.J.M.Mohanty,K.C.Mishra,T.R.Mohanty, P.C.Mohaparana. For Opp.Parties – M/s.A.R.Dash, R.N.Behera & S.N.Nanda-1. *W.P.(C) NO.6994 OF 2005. In the matter of an application under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India. S.C. PARIJA, J. The action of the Life Insurance Corporation of India (for short ‘L.I.C.’) in repudiating all its liabilities under Policy Nos.583852302, 583851466 and 583707315, on the ground that the deceased insured had 33
Page 1 and 2: 2010 ( I ) ILR-CUT- 271 I.M.QUDDUSI
Page 3 and 4: SK.IBRAHIM -V- STATE OF ORISSA [B.K
Page 5 and 6: 2010 ( I ) ILR-CUT- 275 I.M.QUDDUSI
Page 7 and 8: MIRJA SIDDIK -V- STATE OF ORISSA ju
Page 9 and 10: 23 DILIP KUMAR RAY -V- STATE OF ORI
Page 15 and 16: 2010 ( I ) ILR-CUT- 285 B.P.DAS,J &
Page 17: NITYANANDA BEHERA -V- STATE [S.C.PA
Page 21 and 22: ANUPAMA BEHERA -V- D.M., LIC OF IND
Page 23 and 24: ANUPAMA BEHERA -V- D.M., LIC OF IND
Page 25 and 26: 39 13. In the case of P. J. Chacko
Page 27 and 28: 2010 ( I ) ILR-CUT- 297 L.MOHAPATRA
Page 29 and 30: 43 Court in the case of M/s. Thunga
Page 31 and 32: 45 and (c) on account of some mista
Page 33 and 34: “ The High Court held that the re
Page 35 and 36: 49 Deputy Superintendent of Police.
Page 37 and 38: The copy of the Station Diary dt.24
Page 39 and 40: 53 accordingly, investigation was t
Page 41 and 42: 55 lying dead with ligature mark on
Page 43 and 44: 11.40(1974) CLT.977 : (Sahadeb Patn
Page 45 and 46: comparative statement showing perfo
Page 47 and 48: 61 construed according to the plain
Page 49 and 50: 63 11. This Court in Sahadeb Pattna
Page 51 and 52: ules and regulations h) Ability to
Page 53 and 54: INDIAN LAW REPORTS, CUTTACK SERIES
Page 59 and 60: 2010 ( I ) ILR-CUT- 328 A.S.NAIDU,J
Page 63 and 64: 2010 ( I ) ILR-CUT- 332 PRADIP MOHA
Page 69 and 70:
INDIAN LAW REPORTS, CUTTACK SERIES
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
91 impression of bias and favourtis
Page 79 and 80:
2010 ( I ) ILR-CUT- 348 M.M.DAS,J.
Page 81 and 82:
95 hearing the appeal set aside the
Page 83 and 84:
97 and the parties to the lease are
Page 85 and 86:
2010 ( I ) ILR-CUT- 354 R.N.BISWAL,
Page 87 and 88:
101 cargo, which was unfit for ship
Page 89 and 90:
103 This Section stipulates that ap
Page 91 and 92:
105 Sub-section (2) of Section 7 of
Page 93 and 94:
107 further, in the meantime also t
Page 95 and 96:
109 “…… The High Court was of
Page 97 and 98:
111 learned Subordinate Judge on th
Page 99 and 100:
2010 ( I ) ILR-CUT- 368 SANJU PANDA
Page 101 and 102:
115 OLR 791 (Sk. Mustafa and anothe
Page 103 and 104:
2010 ( I ) ILR-CUT- 372 SANJU PANDA
Page 105 and 106:
119 Rs. 71,74,451/- for repair of t
Page 107 and 108:
121 reported in AIR 1989 SC 1239 (A
Page 109 and 110:
123 already quoted and the aforesai
Page 111 and 112:
125 offending truck. The further ca
Page 113 and 114:
2010 ( I ) ILR-CUT- 382 B.P.RAY,J.
Page 115 and 116:
129 to any person, or to consent th
Page 117 and 118:
2010 ( I ) ILR-CUT- 386 B.P.RAY, J.
Page 119 and 120:
133 testimony of the victim in a ca
Page 121 and 122:
135 relationship of the appellant w
Page 123 and 124:
137 Officer,Bangalore). 3.AIR 1996
Page 125 and 126:
139 restored, only to avoid the ord
Page 127 and 128:
2010 ( I ) ILR-CUT- 396 141 B.K.PAT
Page 129 and 130:
143 4.12.1997. The vehicle was insu
Page 131 and 132:
145 vehicle and insurance policy tr
Page 133 and 134:
147 place from the date of sale whe
Page 135 and 136:
149 deemed to have issued to the in
Page 137 and 138:
151 6. On an analysis of Sections 9
Page 139 and 140:
153 the policy purports to cover in
Page 141 and 142:
2010 ( I ) ILR-CUT- 410 B.K.NAYAK,
Page 143 and 144:
157 “….. The decision in the ca
Page 145 and 146:
2010 ( I ) ILR-CUT- 414 S.K.MISHRA,
Page 147 and 148:
161 the imposition of fine of Rs.50
Page 149 and 150:
163 overtuous regarding sex. Theref
Page 151 and 152:
165 6. The learned trial court, aft
Page 153 and 154:
167 The Opposite parties 2 to 11 ar
Page 155 and 156:
169 3. It is undisputed at this sta
Page 157:
shall dispose of the application on
show all

ORIGINAL JURISDICTION - Orissa High Court

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?