Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.71 seconds)
Smt. Meena W/O Lat. Balkishan vs H.D.F.C.Standard Life Ins. Co.Ltd. on 10 October, 2019 cites

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd vs The Great Eastern Shipping Co. Ltd on 12 October, 2007

loksZPp U;k;ky; ds fu.kZ; 2008 I Supreme Court Cases 503 BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD. Vs. GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO. LTD. ds iSjk 19 esa tks fuEu izdkj gS %& 19. It is, no doubt, true that the general rule is that 8 an offer is not accepted by mere silence on the part of the offeree, yet it does not mean that an acceptance always has to be given in so many words. Under certain circumstances, offeree's silence, coupled with his conduct, which takes the form of a positive act, may constitute an acceptance - an agreement sub silentio. Therefore, the terms of a contract between the parties can be proved not only by their words but also by their conduct.
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 48 - D K Jain - Full Document

Icici Prudential Life Insurance ... vs Smt. Bimal Kanta Kharab on 5 December, 2012

I (2013) CPJ 155 (NC) ICICI PRUDENTIAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. Vs. BIMAL KANTA KHARAB esa ekuuh; jk"Vªh; vk;ksx us fuEu fu/kkZfjr fd;k gS %& Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Sections 2 (1) (g), 14 (1) (d), 21 (b) - Insurance (Life) -Death Claim - Repudiated on ground that accident occurred within 45 days from date of commencement of life cover - Deficiency in service - District Forum allowed complaint - State Commission dismissed appeal - Hence revision - cheque for insurance premium was issued by deceased on 13.12.2006, while he died on 30.01.2007
National Consumer Disputes Redressal Cites 3 - Cited by 7 - Full Document

Smt. Kewala Devi And Anr. vs Krishna Devi And Anr. on 11 July, 2017

& ANR. Vs. KRISHNA DEVI esa ekuuh; jk"Vªh; vk;ksx us fuEu fu/kkZfjr fd;k gS %& Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Sections 2 (1) (g), 14 (1) (d), 21 (b) - Insurance (Life) - Death Claim - Delay in intimation alleged - Claim repudiated Deficiency in service - District Forum allowed complaint - State Commission dismissed appeal - Hence revision - Complainant is an illeterate lady -- she could not file claim within 180 days--Petitioner had sufficient time to find out whether claim made by her is true or false - There was unnecessary delay in accepting proposal - Complainant has continuous cause of action - Mala fide intention on part of petitioner - Repudiation not justified.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 2 - Full Document
1