Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.37 seconds)
The Divisional Manager vs Smt Channawwa on 9 January, 2013 cites

The Oriental Insurance Co Ltd vs Sri K C Subramanyam S/O Lt Chakrapathi on 12 July, 2012

4. The issue regarding as to whether the Insurance Company can be directed to pay the amount awarded by the Tribunal and recover the same from the : 10 : owner of the vehicle, even in case of there being a breach of policy conditions was an issue before the Division Bench in the matter of The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Sri.K.C.Subramanyam and Another, which appeal came to be disposed of on 12.07.2012. The Division Bench had formulated following points for its consideration:
Karnataka High Court Cites 60 - Cited by 54 - Full Document

Regional Director Employees A State ... vs Ramanuja Match Industrirs on 27 November, 1984

"99. In discharging its interpretative function, the Court can correct obvious drafting errors and so in suitable cases the Court will add words, or omit words or substitute words. But : 11 : before interpreting a statute in this way the Court must be abundantly sure of three matters: (1) the intended purpose of the statute or provision in question, (2) that by inadvertence the draftsman and Parliament failed to give effect to that purpose in the provision in question; and (3) the substance of the provision Parliament would have made, although not necessarily the precise words Parliament would have used, had the error in the Bill been noticed. Before any words are read to repair as omission in the Act, it should be possible to state with certainty that these or similar words would have been inserted by the draftsman and approved by Parliament had their attention been drawn to the omission before the Bill passed into law. But it is equally well settled as held by the Apex Court in the case of Regional Director ESI Corporation Vs. V.Ramanuja Match Industries that, we do not doubt that the beneficial legislations should have liberal construction with a view to implementing the legislative intent, but where such beneficial has a scheme of its own there is no warrant for the court to travel beyond the scheme and extend the scope of statute on the pretext of extending the statutory benefit to those who are not covered by the scheme. Courts cannot introduce words into the statute nor they could rewrite the statute.
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 136 - M Rangnath - Full Document
1