Delhi High Court - Orders
Madhu Bansal vs Life Insurance Corporation Of India & ... on 5 August, 2020
Author: Jyoti Singh
Bench: Jyoti Singh
$~A-14
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P. (C) 4564/2020
MADHU BANSAL ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Akshat Gupta & Mr. Swaroop
George, Advocates
versus
LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA & ANR.
..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Kamal Mehta, Advocate for R-
1/LIC
Mr.Tanveer Ansari, Advocate for R-2
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH
ORDER
% 05.08.2020 Hearing has been conducted through Video Conferencing. Mr. Kamal Mehta Learned Counsel appearing for Respondent No. 1 had sought time on the last date of hearing to take instructions in the matter.
Mr. Mehta submits that although Petitioner's Agency with LIC was terminated way back w.e.f. 01.11.1994 and the concerned records are also not readily available or may have been weeded out, yet some amount of gratuity has been worked out and shall be disbursed to the Petitioner by the end of next week. The same will, however, be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of Respondent No.1 to take objections, if any, in the Counter Affidavit regarding delay and latches in filing the present Petition as well as the Petitioner's eligibility to claim Gratuity.
Needless to state that the payment of the part amount by Respondent No. 1 and the acceptance thereof by the Petitioner, will be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the respective parties in the present Petition.
Mr. Mehta seeks a period of four weeks to file Reply. Reply be filed within four weeks from today. Rejoinder thereto, if any, be filed before the next date of hearing.
Mr. Tanveer Ansari Advocate appears on behalf of Respondent No. 2 and submits that he is only a pro-forma party and does not wish to file any Reply.
List on 11th September, 2020.
JYOTI SINGH, J AUGUST 05, 2020 rd