Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.99 seconds)

Brij Mohan Singh vs Priya Brat Narain Sinha And Ors on 5 February, 1964

9.     In the instant case, it is not disputed that the petitioner had insured the poultry shed. The damage to the shed is admitted by the respondent since the surveyor appointed by it has vide his report dated 23.06.2015 noted and itemised the list of damages due to what he has himself acknowledged to be the result of a storm as a proximate cause. The issue of whether the storm occurred or the time it reportedly damaged the poultry shed is moot. The report of the Revenue officials in matters of natural disasters is usually prepared by the Patwari and the Tehsildar. There is such a report available. The respondent has stated that no panchnama prepared by the revenue authorities is there to support the occurrence of the incident. The petitioner's reliance on Brij Mohan Singh (supra) is pertinent in this connection since the report of the Tehsildar and the Patwari is not challenged by the respondent. The State Commission has erred in not considering this fact.
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 200 - K C Gupta - Full Document

Rubi(Chandra) Dutta vs M/S United India Insurance Co.Ltd on 18 March, 2011

8.     The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rubi (Chandra) Dutta vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd., (2011) 11 SCC 269, has that "Also, it is to be noted that the revisional powers of the National Commission are derived from Section 21 (b) of the Act, under which the said power can be exercised only if there is some prima facie jurisdictional error appearing in the impugned order, and only then, may the same be set aside...".
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 420 - D Verma - Full Document

Lourdes Sty.Snehanjali Girls ... vs M/S H & R Jhonson(I) Ltd.& Ors on 2 August, 2016

This principle was reiterated in the case of Lourdes Society Snehanjali Girls Hostel and Ors vs H & R Johnson (India) Ltd., and Ors - (2016) 8 SCC 286 and it was held that "The National Commission has to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it only if the State Commission or the District Forum has either failed to exercise their jurisdiction or exercised when the same was not vested in them or exceeded their jurisdiction by acting illegally or with material irregularity...".
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 199 - V G Gowda - Full Document
1