Month: May 2023

LIC CANNOT DENY PAYMENT OF THE INSURANCE MONEY TO THE DEPENDANTS OF THE POLICY HOLDER ON TRIVIAL GROUNDS: THAT’S WHAT BOMBAY HIGH COURT HELD IN “SMT. DIPASHRI V. LIC”

First is that LIC is missing an important ingredient which is required for the application of the Section 45 mandating that the person who is applying for a policy “knew at the time” of applying for Insurance Policy, that he is suffering from a disease because only then it will be called a fraud.

IF A BANK DISHONOUR YOUR CHEQUE ILLEGALLY, YOU CAN ASK FOR COMPENSATION FROM THE BANK FOR ALL THE LOSSES WHICH YOU FACE BECAUSE OF SUCH DISHONOUR: THAT’S WHAT MADRAS HIGH COURT HELD IN “CANARA BANK VS I.V. RAJAGOPAL”

Contracts are sacrosanct and that is the reason why we keep so much money in the Banks even though it offers dirt cheap interest rates (currently Banks only offer around 7 % of Fixed Deposits, that too if you deposit money for more than One year, which is not even enough to beat inflation let alone giving some savings to a customer) therefore it is the duty of the Banks also to deal with the Customers with utmost honesty and diligence.  

AN OFFICIAL LIQUIDATOR IN LIQUIDATION PROCEEDINGS IS NOT ENTITLED TO ASK A DIRECTOR TO PAY THE DUES OF THE COMPANY FROM HIS PERSONAL INCOME : THAT’S WHAT BOMBAY HIGH COURT HELD IN “SHRI VIMALKUMAR RAVJI SHAH V/S THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND  ORGANISATION, SOLAPUR & ORS”

If ESIC wants to effect a recovery from the company it can sell the assets of the company but the personal assets of the Directors are out of reach for it

EVEN IF YOU PURCHASE A PROPERTY UNDER THE INNOCENT BELIEF THAT SELLER IS THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, THOUGH HE IS NOT, YOU ARE ENTITLED TO GET THE PROPERTY BACK IF THE SELLER BECOMES OWNER AT A LATER DATE: THAT’S WHAT SUPREME COURT HELD IN “JUMMA MASJID, MERCARA VS KODIMANIANDRA DEVIAH”(PART-II)

P being his only son becomes owner of the Bungalow as per Section 8 of Hindu Succession Act. Now Section 43 comes into picture and W can ask the Court to force P to transfer the Bungalow in his name. This is the true interpretation of Section 43.

EVEN IF YOU PURCHASE A PROPERTY UNDER THE INNOCENT BELIEF THAT SELLER IS THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, THOUGH HE IS NOT, YOU ARE ENTITLED TO GET THE PROPERTY BACK IF THE SELLER BECOMES OWNER AT A LATER DATE: THAT’S WHAT SUPREME COURT HELD IN “JUMMA MASJID, MERCARA VS KODIMANIANDRA DEVIAH”(PART-I)

In these articles we will understand the meaning of the terms like Issueless, Spes Successionis, Absolute Owner of a Property, Life Interest Holder in a Property, Mutation. Also we will know about the rights of a widow without children before Hindu Succession Act and afterwards i.e. today, who is an absolute owner and who is a life interest holder, what is a Separate Property of a person.