citedby: 458197

Life Corporation Of India vs Permanent Lok Adalat & Anr on 2 November, 2022

22. The judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the matter of Bhanumati Dayaram Mhatre (supra) relied upon by the counsel for the respondent does not take into consideration the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Anuradha (supra). The respondent thus cannot be extended any benefit of the above judgment to support his case.

Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 36 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

C Mohanta vs M/O Railways on 4 December, 2017

In view of the judicial pronouncement in the LIC of India vs. Anuradha (supra) and in view of the provision of Section 108 of the Indian Evidence Act, it will be logical to hold that the husband of the applicant is presumed to be dead and the applicant will be entitled to full retirement benefits as per her entitlement. RRE No.63/91 has provided for the same on furnishing of indemnity bonds by recipients of the retirement benefits. In the present case, the balance of law gravitates towards the applicant receiving the full retirement benefits as per her entitlement according to rules prescribed therefor.

Central Administrative Tribunal - Cuttack Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

O I C vs Mohd Hameed on 30 October, 2017

Hon'ble Apex Court in Para 9, 11 and 12 of it's judgment rendered in LIC of India versus Anuradha (supra) held and observed as under :-

Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Om Prakash And Anr vs Sriniwas And Ors on 5 February, 2022

In the case of LIC Vs. Anuradha (supra), while dealing with the issue regarding presumption of civil death, Hon'ble the Supreme Court has held as under:-

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur Cites 89 - Cited by 0 - D Kachhawaha - Full Document

Sh. Deepak Kumar vs The State on 29 April, 2023

This view is affirmed in LIC of India Vs. Anuradha wherein it was held that:-

Delhi District Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

F/M Dhanraj Dev Kishan And Anr vs Sriniwas And Ors on 5 February, 2022

In the case of LIC Vs. Anuradha (supra), while dealing with the issue regarding presumption of civil death, Hon'ble the Supreme Court has held as under:-

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur Cites 89 - Cited by 0 - D Kachhawaha - Full Document

Mrs. Roma Sachdeva vs State on 18 March, 2008

15.The facts of this case are identical to the case of LIC Vs. Anuradha wherein supreme court rejected the claim of the petitioner. In view of the above discussion, petition is dismissed as being not maintainable.

Delhi District Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Bhanwar Lal vs Sriniwas And Ors on 5 February, 2022

In the case of LIC Vs. Anuradha (supra), while dealing with the issue regarding presumption of civil death, Hon'ble the Supreme Court has held as under:-

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur Cites 89 - Cited by 0 - D Kachhawaha - Full Document

Harpreet Kaur & Anr vs Surjit Kaur on 7 October, 2016

36. As per the observations of Apex Court in LIC of India Vs. Anuradha(supra), the issue relating to date or time of death has to be determined on the basis of evidence direct or circumstantial led by the parties on file.

Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - S Gupta - Full Document

Northern Power Distribution Co. Ltd. & ... vs Alwala Mangamma & Ors. on 19 November, 2013

6. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that death should be presumed from 10.10.2001, whereas learned Counsel for the respondent submitted that death to be presumed from 21.5.2010 or at the earliest from 9.5.2009 when Civil Suit for declaration was filed. Learned Counsel for the respondent has placed reliance on (2004) 10 SCC 131 LIC of India Vs. Anuradha in which such type of controversy has been dealt at length in paragraphs 14 to 16, which runs as under:

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Cites 10 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Search Results Page

Refine Search

Search Results