w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Life Insurance Corporation Of India Through Its Additional Secretary(Legal), New Delhi v/s Raj Vilas Dongre & Others


Company & Directors' Information:- DONGRE AND COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U24232UP1958PTC002713

Company & Directors' Information:- NEW INDIA CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U36999TN1940PTC001776

Company & Directors' Information:- I.N. INSURANCE COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U67200DL1994PTC062554

Company & Directors' Information:- INSURANCE OF INDIA LTD [Strike Off] CIN = U67200WB1936PLC008634

    Revision Petition Nos. 1949 to 1952 of 2018

    Decided On, 03 March 2020

    At, National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. JAIN
    By, PRESIDING MEMBER

    For the Petitioner: Sanjay K. Chadha, Advocate. For the Respondents: Sameer Shrivastava, Arjun Singh, Advocates.



Judgment Text


Oral:

Late Smt. Usha Dongre wife of the complainant took as many as four insurance policies from the petitioner LIC of India submitting four different proposals one of them being dated 25.04.2014 and the remaining three being dated 18.04.2014. She having died on 21.06.2014 within about two months of submitting the proposals, claims in terms of the insurance policies taken by her were lodged by the complainant. The claims were repudiated vide letter dated 03.11.2015.which to the extent it is relevant, reads as under:-

We have to inform you regarding your death claim with respect to the above issued policies of deceased Late Usha Dongre that the deceased during the time of taking the policy from us has concealed the material fact regarding her health and has decided to deny our all liabilities under the above policies. In this regard we have to inform you that the deceased insured has given the following reply to the question mentioned in duly signed personal history to the proposal form dated 25.04.2014, 18.04.2014, 18.04.2014 and 18.04.2014 for insurance purpose. “

Question Answer

11-A During the last five years did you ever consult a medical practitioner for any ailment requiring treatment for more than a week? NO

11-B Have you ever been admitted to any hospital or Nursing Home for general check-up, observation, treatment or operation? NO

11-C Have you ever remained absent from place of work on grounds of health during the last 5 years? NO

11-D Are you suffering from or have you ever suffered from ailments pertaining to Liver, Stomach, Stomach, Heart, Lungs Kidney, Brain or nervous system? NO

11-E Are you suffering from or have you ever suffered from diabetes, tuberculosis, high blood pressure, low blood pressure, cancer, epilepsy, hernia, hydrocele, leprosy or any other disease ? NO

11-F Do you have any bodily defect or deformity? NO

11-G Did you ever bave any accident or injury ? NO

11-H Do you consume or have you ever consumed?

1. Alcoholic Drinks-NO

2. Narcotics - NO

3. Any other drugs-NO

4. Tobacco in any form-NO

11-J What has been your usual state of health? GOOD

11-I Have you ever required or at present availing/undergoing undergoing medical advice, treatment or test in connection with hepatitis 8 or AIDS related condition? NO

Yet we have to state that the above facts were false,because we have undisputed documents to prove that prior to the submission of the proposal form for the abovepolicies, on 25/02/2014 deceased Insured received head injury, therefore on 28.02.2014 the deceased got admitted in Dr. Panna Lal Bapna and on 01.03.2014 discharged from the hospital. Deceased due to Head injury do irrelevant Talk and due to misbehaviour duringthe proposal stage was under suspension. But the deceased has not mentioned the said facts in her life proposal form / personal history. In its place given the false reply which is mentioned above.

Therefore, it is proved that she during taking the policies intentionally given the false statement regarding her health and concealed the true facts and therefore as per the terms & conditions of the policy and the declaration made in the insurance proposal form we reject the insurance claim and accordingly under the above policies not liable and bound for making payment and consequently all the amount which has been paid, not payable to you. Yet as per new provision of Section-45 the premium paid would be refunded as per rules, kindly in this regard contact our Branch Office, Rajnand Gaon.

2. Being aggrieved from the repudiation of the claim the complainant approached the concerned District Forum by way of separate consumer complaints.

3. The complaints were resisted by the petitioner Corporation primarily on the grounds on which the claim had been repudiated.

4. The District Forum having dismissed the consumer complaints, the complainant/R-1 approached the concerned State Commission by way of separate appeals. Vide impugned orders dated 26.12.2027 the State Commission allowed the appeals and directed the petitioner Corporation to pay the sum assured to the complainant along with interest and compensation. Being aggrieved from the order passed by the State Commission the petitioner corporation is before this Commission.

5. The proposals as noted earlier were submitted by the deceased insured in April 2014. A perusal of the proposals would show that while answering the questions contained in the proposal, she clearly stated that in the last 5 years she had not taken treatment for any ailment for a period of more than one week. She also stated that she had not been admitted in any hospital for any kind of treatment investigation etc. She maintained that she had never suffered nor was she suffering from any ailment relating inter alia to brain. She also stated that she had never met with an accident and had not suffered injury.

6. The petitioner Corporation has placed on record the prescription purporting to be issued by Bafna Hospital Dangargarh to Smt. Usha Dongre which shows that she had fallen at her house and had head injuries as a result of which she was talking irrelevant. The petitioner Corporation has also placed on record a certificate of the treatment of Smt. Usha Dongre at Bafna Hospital Dangargarh purporting to be signed and stamped by Dr. Pannalal Bafna of the said Hospital. In the above-referred certificate it is stated that Smt. Usha Dongre was admitted in the hospital on 28.02.2014 and early she had been treated by a doctor. It was also stated in the said certificate that she was talking irrelevant things on account of the head injury suffered by her and the duration of the complaint as reported by her was one month.

7. It is evident from the certificate issued by Bafna hospital and the prescription issued by Pannalal Bafna of the said hospital that Smt. Usha Dongre sustained injuries on head when she had an accidental fall at her residence and treatment for the injury so suffered by her had lasted one month. Therefore, going by the above-referred certificate and prescription issued by Bafna hospital she had made false statements in the proposal submitted by her when she stated that she had not consulted a medical practitioner for any ailment requiring treatment for more than a week. She also gave wrong answers to the question which required her to disclose any accident and injury suffered by her.

8. The submission of the counsel for the complainant/R-1 is that the above-referred record of Bafna hospital was not proved by the petitioner Corporation and since no doctor from the said hospital was examined nor was the affidavit of anyone from the said hospital filed to prove the aforesaid record. As noted earlier, the repudiation letters issued by the petitioner Corporation on 03.11.2015 clearly and very specifically referred to the treatment of Smt. Usha Dongre in Bafna Hospital. It was specifically stated that she was admitted in the hospital by Dr. Pannalal Bafna on 28.02.2014. It was also stated therein that she had suffered head injuries prior to 25.02.2014. The complainant/R-1, however, did not even allege in the consumer complaint filed before the District Forum that late Smt. Usha Dangal had not suffered an accidental injury at her home. It was not even claimed in the consumer complaint that Smt. Usha Dongri was not admitted in Bafna Hospital and had not been treated by Pannalal Bafna. In my opinion, since the accidental injury, alleged to have been suffered by Smt. Usha Dongre and her admission and treatment in Bafna hospital was the sole ground of repudiation of the claims it was imperative for the complainant to at least plead in the consumer complaints that the deceased had not suffered head injury as was claimed in the repudiation letter and had not been admitted and treated in Bafna Hospital.

9. The petitioner Corporation filed written version specifically taking the ground on which the claim had been repudiated. The head injury suffered by deceased and treatment taken by her at Bafna Hospital was specifically referred in the written version filed by the Corporation. No rejoinder to the written version was filed. The complainant had filed an affidavit by way of evidence before the concerned District Forum. Even in the affidavit filed by the complainant it was nowhere claimed that late Smt. Usha Dongre had not suffered a head injury and had not been admitted and treated in Bafna Hospital. In these circumstances the petitioner Corporation, in my opinion, was not required to examine a doctor from Bafna Hospital or to file his affidavit to prove the record pertaining to the admission and treatment of Smt. Usha dogre in the said Hospital.

10. The question involved in these revision petitions recently came up for consideration of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in 9. In LIC of India Vs. Manish Gupta – Civil Apeal No.3944 of 2019, decided on 15.04.2019, the proposal form required a disclosure as to whether the proposer had suffered from Cardiovascular disease, he responded in negative to the said question. The complainant underwent a surgery, submitted a claim which was repudiated on the ground that he was suffering from a pre-existing illness. Upholding the repudiation of the claim, the Hon’ble Supreme Court interalia held as under:-

“A contract of insurance involves utmost good faith. In Satwant Kaur Sandhu Vs. New India Assurance Company Ltd., this Court has held thus:

“...Thus, it needs little emphasis that when an information on a specific aspect is asked for in the proposal form, an assured is under a solemn obligation to make a true and full disclosure of the information on the subject which is within his knowledge. It is not for the proposer to determine whether the information sought for is material for the purpose of the policy or not. Of course, obligation to disclose extends only to facts which are known to the applicant and not to what he ought to have known. The obligation to disclose necessarily depends upon the knowledge one possesses. His opinion of the materiality of that knowledge is of no moment.”

……….The documentary material indicates that there was a clear failure on the part of the respondent to disclose that he had suffered from rheumatic heart disease since childhood. The ground for repudiation was in terms of the exclusions contained in the policy. The failure of the insured to disclose the past history of cardiovascular disease was a valid ground for repudiation.”

In Reliance Life Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr. Vs. Rekhaben Nareshbhai Rathod – Civil Appeal No.4261 of 2019, decided on 24.4.2019, the Hon’ble Supreme Court interalia observed as under:-

“26. …………..It is standard practice for the insurer to set out in the application a series of specific questions regarding the applicant's health history and other matters relevant to insurability. The object of the proposal form is to gather information about a potential client, allowing the insurer to get all information which is material to the insurer to know in order to assess the risk and fix the premium for each potential client. Proposal forms are a significant part of the disclosure procedure and warrant accuracy of statements. Utmost care must be exercised in filling the proposal form. In a proposal form the applicant declares that she/he warrants truth. The contractual duty so imposed is such that any suppression, untruth or inaccuracy in the statement in the proposal form will be considered as a breach of the duty of good faith and will render the policy voidable by the insurer. The system of adequate disclosure helps buyers and sellers of insurance policies to meet at a common point and narrow down the gap of information asymmetries. This allows the parties to serve their interests better and understand the true extent of the contractual agreement.

The finding of a material misrepresentation or concealment in insurance has a significant effect upon both the insured and the insurer in the event of a dispute. The fact it would influence the decision of a prudent insurer in deciding as to whether or not to accept a risk is a material fact. As this Court held in Satwant Kaur (supra) “there is a clear presumption that any information sought for in the proposal form is material for the purpose of entering into a contract of insurane”. Each representation or statement may be material to the risk. The insurance company may still offer insurance protection on altered terms.

29. We are not impressed with the submission that the proposer was unaware of the contents of the form that

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

he was required to fill up or that in assigning such a response to a third party, he was absolved of the consequence of appending his signatures to the proposal. The proposer duly appended his signature to the proposal form and the grant of the insurance cover was on the basis of the statements contained in the proposal form. …………..” 11. The learned counsel for the complainant submits that late Smt. Usha Dongre was duly examined by the panel doctor of LIC of India and the policy was issued to her only after she was examined and found fit by the said doctor. In my opinion the examination by the doctor on the panel of the petitioner Corporation would be of no help, since a contract of insurance being based on utmost good faith it was absolutely essential for the deceased to declare the true state of affairs and give a truthful answer to all the questions contained in the proposals submitted by her. 12. The learned counsel for the complainant relied upon the decision of this commission in Ravinder Singh. In my opinion, no reliance on the aforesaid decision can be placed in view of the authoritative pronouncement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court noted hereinabove. 13. For the reasons stated hereinabove, the impugned order cannot be sustained at the same is hereby set aside. The revision petitions are allowed and consumer complaints are hereby dismissed with no order as to cost.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

04-08-2020 Kaizen Organics Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur Versus National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
04-08-2020 Regional Manager, Bajaj Allianz General Ins. Co. Ltd., New Delhi & Another Versus Capt. Bibhuti Mohan Jha National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
31-07-2020 National Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Rajesh Kumar Dy. Manager, New Delhi Versus Biking Food Products (P) Ltd., Telangana National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
30-07-2020 Som Nath Bhatt Versus Central Provident Fund Commissioner, New Delhi & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
30-07-2020 Som Nath Bhatt Versus Central Provident Fund Commissioner, New Delhi & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
29-07-2020 New Aadinath Plywood & Hardware Through Its Proprietor, Shri Sanjay, M.P. Versus Nandini Photo Studio, M.P. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
28-07-2020 M/s. Royal Sundaram Alliance General Insurance Co.Ltd., Rep.by its Branch Manager, Cantonment Versus Kaanikkaimery & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
27-07-2020 Amar Chand Singh Versus C.B.I. Thru. Director, New Delhi & Others High Court Of Judicature At Allahabad Lucknow Bench
27-07-2020 Tata AIG Life Insurance Co. Ltd., Maharashtra Versus Mampi Dhar (Gosh) & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
27-07-2020 Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Its Duly Constituted Attorney, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., New Delhi Versus Vikash Kumar National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
27-07-2020 IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd., Maharashtra Versus Ashok Laxman Mane & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
24-07-2020 Hindustan Insecticides Ltd., Through Its Authorized Representative, New Delhi Versus Thakar & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
24-07-2020 Gurbax Singh Banga Versus Aviva Life Insurance Co. India Pvt. Ltd., Punjab & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
24-07-2020 National Insurance Company Limited Through Its Duly Constituted Attorney Manager, New Delhi Versus M/s. D.D Spinners Pvt. Ltd., Panipat National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
22-07-2020 M/s. TDI Infrastructure Ltd. (Through Its Authorised Representative), New Delhi Versus Sukhmal Jain & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
22-07-2020 Reliance Nippon Life Insurance Co. Ltd., Maharashtra Versus Sujoy Chatterjee National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
22-07-2020 Director of Income Tax-II (International Taxation) New Delhi & Another Versus M/s. Samsung Heavy Industries Co. Ltd. Supreme Court of India
21-07-2020 SBI Life Insurance Co. Ltd., West Bengal Versus Kajari Gayen & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
21-07-2020 Maruti Suzuki India Limited, New Delhi Versus Mukesh Kumar & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
21-07-2020 Ex-Subedar Vinod Kumar Sharma Versus National Insurance Co. Ltd. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
20-07-2020 Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. & Another Versus Mahesh Gundappa Gouder In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
20-07-2020 National Insurance Co. Ltd. Through National Legal Vertical, New Delhi Versus M/s. Krishna Spico Industries Pvt. Ltd., Ghaziabad & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
17-07-2020 M/s. Arudra Engineering Private Limited, Represented by its Managing Director, R. Natraj Versus M/s. Pathanjali Ayurved Limited, Represented by its Director, New Delhi High Court of Judicature at Madras
17-07-2020 Branch Manager, Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited, Chhattisgarh Versus Ansat Siya & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
16-07-2020 Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Chandan Tulsidas Gauthankar & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
10-07-2020 Life Insurance Corporation of India Through Its Additional Secretary (Legal), New Delhi Versus Anil Laxman Matade National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
10-07-2020 Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Matilda Fernandes & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Goa
10-07-2020 IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Co. Limited, Chhattisgarh Versus Kamin Bai & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
09-07-2020 New Nagpur Mahila Gramin Vikas Credit Co-Operative Society Ltd. & Another Versus Suman Balaji Thakre National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
09-07-2020 Abdul Wahid Bhat Versus Union of India, through Defence Secretary, New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh Bench
09-07-2020 Ravindra Versus Union of India, through its Under Secretary, General Administration Department, New Delhi & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
09-07-2020 Khem Raj Verma & Others Versus Union of India, through Ministry of Human Resource & Development, Department of Higher Education, New Delhi & Another Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh Bench
08-07-2020 Velankani Information Systems Limited, Represented by its Manging Director, Kiron D. Shah Versus Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs Government of India, New Delhi & Others High Court of Karnataka
07-07-2020 Rajesh Kumar Versus Union of India through the Secretary Ministry of Communication, New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
06-07-2020 National Insurance Co. Ltd., Chennai Versus A. Badurinssa & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
06-07-2020 M/s. Liberty General Insurance Limited (formerly known as M/s. Liberty Videocon General Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Md. Haseena & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
03-07-2020 Bar Council of India, New Delhi, Represented by Its Secretary Versus Lokanath Behera Ips, Director, Vigilance & Anti Corruption Bureau, Thiruvananthapuram & Others High Court of Kerala
02-07-2020 Life Insurance Corporation of India, through Manager (L & HPF), (CG) Versus Dhanya Kumar Jain & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
01-07-2020 M/s. Gulabchand Shankar Versus Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Rajasthan & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
01-07-2020 Seema Shukla Versus New Delhi Municipal Corporation & Another High Court of Delhi
30-06-2020 Dr. P.S. Sandeep & Others Versus The Government of India, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
30-06-2020 M/s. United India Insurance Company Limited Versus Md. Khayyumkhan & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
29-06-2020 Ramesh Malhotra & Another Versus Emaar Mgf Land Limited, Through its Managing Director, New Delhi & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
29-06-2020 R. Sampath Versus Union of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, rep. by its Secretary, New Delhi & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
26-06-2020 Reliance Life Insurance Co. Ltd. & Another Versus Girijabai & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
26-06-2020 Reliance Nippon Life Insurance Co. Ltd. & Another Versus Sajal Kumar Banerjee National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
26-06-2020 Sri Ananta Das, Assam & Others Versus Union of India, Represented by the Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Agriculture, New Delhi & Others High Court of Gauhati
25-06-2020 United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Amar Singh Raghuwanshi National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
25-06-2020 M/s. Goodwill Leather Art Rep By its Prop Md Quddus ALi Alias Md Quddus Ali Molla Versus National Insurance Co. Ltd. & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
25-06-2020 Amar Plastics Versus Iffco-Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd. & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
25-06-2020 India Pentecostal Church of God, Represented by Its General President, Pastor (Dr.) T. Valson Abraham & Another Versus Government of India, Represented by Its Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi & Others High Court of Kerala
23-06-2020 Swetha Shri Selvakumar Versus Union of India, Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
23-06-2020 M/s. Jain Textiles, Ashok Jain Versus United India Insurance Company Ltd. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
23-06-2020 M/s. Acme Trade And Agencies, ASSAM Versus Union of India Rep. By The Secy. to the Govt. of India, Ministry of Finance, Deptt. of Revenue, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
22-06-2020 M/s. New Green Medical Hall Versus State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Health Department, Government of Bihar & Others High Court of Judicature at Patna
22-06-2020 M/s. New India Assurance Company Limited Versus Ravula Shanker @ Shanker Goud & Another High Court of for the State of Telangana
19-06-2020 Ram Avtar Versus National Insurance Co. Ltd. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
18-06-2020 Surendra Kumar Bhilawe Versus The New India Assurance Company Limited Supreme Court of India
18-06-2020 Jaspreet Singh Bakshi Versus SBI General Insurance Company Ltd., Chandigarh & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
18-06-2020 Rajendra Singh & Others Versus National Insurance Company Limited & Others Supreme Court of India
17-06-2020 D.D. Industries Ltd., New Delhi Versus Jasmeet Walia & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
17-06-2020 Ashish Aggarwal Versus Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Limited, New Delhi National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
16-06-2020 M/s. Sbi Cards & Payments Services Ltd., New Delhi Versus Vishal Sabharwal & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
16-06-2020 Savitha Versus M/s. Cholamandalam M.S. General Insurance Co. Ltd. & Others Supreme Court of India
16-06-2020 Union of India, Represented by The Secretary Posts, Ministry of Communication, Department of Posts, New Delhi & Others Versus G. Lakshmi & Others High Court of Kerala
15-06-2020 Piara Ram Versus National Insurance Co. Ltd. Through Its Manager, Punjab National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
15-06-2020 New India Assurance Company Ltd. Through Its Duly Constituted Attorney Manager, New Delhi Versus Aasha Devi & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
15-06-2020 Samri Devi Shaw Versus New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Mumbai & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
15-06-2020 The New India Assurance Company Limited, Thampanoor, Now Represented by Its Manager, Regional Office, Kochi Versus Managing Director, KSRTC, Thiruvananthapuram High Court of Kerala
12-06-2020 Dr. D. Euvalingam & Others Versus The Secretary to Government, Ministry of Human Resource Development, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
12-06-2020 M.V. Ramani Versus The Union of India, Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
12-06-2020 The New India Assurance Company Limited, Rep. by its Branch Manager, Punnam Chander complex, Chowrastha, Hanmkonda, Warangal Versus Sangeraboina Uppalaiah & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
12-06-2020 M.H. Uma Maheshwari & Others Versus United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Another Supreme Court of India
09-06-2020 Cry for Life Society, Thrissur, Represented by Its President, E.C. George & Others Versus Union of India, Represented by The Cabinet Secretary, New Delhi & Others High Court of Kerala
05-06-2020 Tanveer Jahan Versus All India Institute Of Medical Science, Through Its Director, New Delhi & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
05-06-2020 Vinita Sethi Versus ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Company Ltd. & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
05-06-2020 Suresh Nair Versus Union of India, Represented by the Ministry of External Affairs, E-Block, Central Secretariat, New Delhi, Represented by its Secretary & Others High Court of Kerala
04-06-2020 M/s. United India Insurance Company Limited, Chennai Versus N. Prathap & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-06-2020 Goods & Services Tax Network, New Delhi & Others Versus M/s. Leo Distributors, Thrissur & Others High Court of Kerala
02-06-2020 Indian Overseas Bank Officers' Association, Reg No: 321/MDS, Rep by its Joint General Secretary, R. Muthukumar Versus Union of India, Represented by its Secretary to Government, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
02-06-2020 Citizens Legal Right Association, Rep. by Its President, Joshy Kalluveettil & Another Versus Union of India, Through Its Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi & Others High Court of Kerala
02-06-2020 New India Assurance Company, R.B.Road Extension, Mysore Versus Madevan & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
01-06-2020 P. Subramanian Versus The Insurance Ombudsman, Teynampet & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
27-05-2020 Jeetha Agnes Versus Union of India, Represented by The Secretary To Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi & Others High Court of Kerala
27-05-2020 Union of India, Rep. by the Secretary, Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying & Fisheries, Government of India, New Delhi & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
22-05-2020 Union of India, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, New Delhi Versus Oriental Bank of Commerce, Gurgaon National Company Law Appellate Tribunal
20-05-2020 A. Sennimalai Versus Tourism Finance Corporation of India Ltd., New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
20-05-2020 The Bank of New York Mellon, Through its attorney Navneet Singh Versus Indowind Energy Limited, Nungambakkam, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
19-05-2020 Brij Kishore Dwivedi Versus Union of India, represented by and through the Secretary to the Government of India, New Delhi in the Ministry of Home Affairs, South Block, New Delhi & Others High Court of Tripura
19-05-2020 K.N. Anilkumar Versus Bar Council of India, Represented by Its Secretary, New Delhi & Others High Court of Kerala
19-05-2020 Branch Manager Tata AIG General Insurance Company Limited, Bilaspur C.G. Versus Kashi Ram Sahu & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
18-05-2020 RM. Swamy Versus Government of India, Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
15-05-2020 T. Sivakumar Versus The Secretary to Government of India, Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, A-Wing, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
15-05-2020 Jacob George Versus The Secretary Department of Information & Broadcasting, New Delhi & Others High Court of Karnataka
08-05-2020 Ibrahim Elettil, President, Dubai KMCC, Elettil, Kozhikode & Others Versus Union of India, Represented by Its Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs, New Delhi & Others High Court of Kerala
07-05-2020 Asa Uma Farooq Versus Union of India, through its its Secrtary, Ministry of Home Afairs, Government of India, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
05-05-2020 B. Abimathi Versus The Director General of Health Services, Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, New Delhi & Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
05-05-2020 K. Lakshmanan, Adilabad, Telangana Versus Union of India, Represented by Secretary, Department of Defence, New Delhi & Others High Court of Kerala
04-05-2020 Sam Uttan Versus The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment, Govt. of India, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Patna
30-04-2020 United Nurses Association, Through Its State President Shoby Joseph, Thrissur Versus Union Of India, Represented By The Secretary, New Delhi & Another High Court of Kerala