Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.19 seconds)

Sukhdev Singh, Oil & Natural Gas ... vs Bhagat Ram, Association Of Clause Ii. ... on 21 February, 1975

In case the policy holder had not paid the premium within the grace period and had not revived the policy during the revival period, nothing was to be paid to the policy holder. The respondent/complainant had paid only the initial premium and renewal premium has also not been paid by him, the policy was to be lapsed as it was not revived by the respondent/complainant within a period of two years and it was ultimately terminated at the end of revival period. Moreover, the Proposal Form is the basis of Contract of Insurance which has been duly signed by the complainant. Learned proxy counsel has also relied upon judgments i.e. "Life Insurance Corporation of India & another Vs. Sunita" 2022(1) 7 First Appeal No.78 of 2022 SCC-68, "LIC of India Vs. Ani P Tadkalkar" R.P. No.663 of 1994, decided on 08.11.1995 and "LIC Vs. Mani Ram" III (2005) CPJ 31 (SC) in support of his arguments.
Supreme Court of India Cites 105 - Cited by 110 - K K Mathew - Full Document

Life Insurance Corporation Of India vs Sunita on 29 October, 2021

In case the policy holder had not paid the premium within the grace period and had not revived the policy during the revival period, nothing was to be paid to the policy holder. The respondent/complainant had paid only the initial premium and renewal premium has also not been paid by him, the policy was to be lapsed as it was not revived by the respondent/complainant within a period of two years and it was ultimately terminated at the end of revival period. Moreover, the Proposal Form is the basis of Contract of Insurance which has been duly signed by the complainant. Learned proxy counsel has also relied upon judgments i.e. "Life Insurance Corporation of India & another Vs. Sunita" 2022(1) 7 First Appeal No.78 of 2022 SCC-68, "LIC of India Vs. Ani P Tadkalkar" R.P. No.663 of 1994, decided on 08.11.1995 and "LIC Vs. Mani Ram" III (2005) CPJ 31 (SC) in support of his arguments.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 6 - B M Trivedi - Full Document

Life Insurance Corporation Of India vs Anil P. Tadkalkar on 8 November, 1995

In case the policy holder had not paid the premium within the grace period and had not revived the policy during the revival period, nothing was to be paid to the policy holder. The respondent/complainant had paid only the initial premium and renewal premium has also not been paid by him, the policy was to be lapsed as it was not revived by the respondent/complainant within a period of two years and it was ultimately terminated at the end of revival period. Moreover, the Proposal Form is the basis of Contract of Insurance which has been duly signed by the complainant. Learned proxy counsel has also relied upon judgments i.e. "Life Insurance Corporation of India & another Vs. Sunita" 2022(1) 7 First Appeal No.78 of 2022 SCC-68, "LIC of India Vs. Ani P Tadkalkar" R.P. No.663 of 1994, decided on 08.11.1995 and "LIC Vs. Mani Ram" III (2005) CPJ 31 (SC) in support of his arguments.
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Cites 0 - Cited by 5 - Full Document
1