Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Patna High Court - Orders

Smt.Puspa Pandey vs L.I.C.Of India & Ors on 6 January, 2009

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                CWJC No.3440 of 2005
                                       With
                                CWJC No.3550 of 2005
                                      --------

SRI JAI KUMAR PANDEY, son of Sri Kapil Deo Pandey, resident of Village - and P.O.
Kirhindi, P.S. Sheo Sagar, District - Rohtas at present agent Code no. 205/51 K, B.M. Club
Member Life Insurance of India Sasaram, Branch office Sasaram
                               .......................... Petitioner (In CWJC no.3440/2005)

SMT.PUSPA PANDEY, wife of Dinesh Pandey, resident of Village and P.O. Kirhindi, P S - Sheo
Sagar, District-Rohtas at present Agent Code No. 2585/511, B.M.Club Member Life Insurance of
India Sasaram, Branch Office Sasaram
                                         ................... Petitioner (In CWJC No. 3550/2005)

                                            Versus
1. Life Insurance Corporation of India, through its Chairman, Head office, Jiwan Bima Marg,
Mubbai-21.
2. Senior Divisional Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India, Patna Division Office Patna,
Jivan Prakash Mazaroolhak Path, Patna.
3. Branch Manager Sasaram, Branch Office, L.I.C. Sasaram.
                                         ...................... Respondents (In both the cases)
                                           -----------


 04.     06.01.2009

In both the writ applications final order dated Ist day of December, 2008 has been passed whereby the agency of the petitioners has been terminated under Rule 16(1)(b) of the LIC of India (Agents) Rules, 1972.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Life Insurance Corporation of India submits that the petitioners have right of statutory appeal and they may avail the same.

This position has not been controverted by the counsel for the petitioners.

The writ applications are permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to the petitioners to challenge the order dated Ist December, 2008.

If any limitation comes into play in filing of the appeal the appellate authority would condone the same in view of the fact that writ applications were pending before this Court. It is hoped and expected that the petitioners would file the appeal within six weeks from today.

rkp                       (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J)