ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD. Vs. ADANI EXPORTS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ONLY because the learned advocate for the Insurance Company is changed, who is before this Court by way of appellant, the Insurance Company cannot be allowed to play second inning, may be that the learned advocate now representing the Insurance Company is more sincere and competent, but in Letters Patent Appeal, this Court is required to consider the legality and validity of the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge in light of the material, which was produced before the learned Single Judge.

(2.) AS is apparent in this case, the Insurance Company contested the Special Civil Application in a very casual manner. If the affidavit-in-reply filed by one Shri Sanjay Srivastava is perused, there are admissions to the effect that, 'there are certain mistakes on the part of the respondent-company or its Officer.' To illustrate the same in affidavit filed by Shri Sanjay Srivastava affirmed on dated blank, March, 2001. It is stated in Sub-para of Para-7 that,

(3.) THESE contentions of the petitioner- respondent no.1 herein are replied by the affidavit-in-reply filed by Shri Sanjay Srivastava an officer of the Insurance Company and Para-7 of the affidavit-in-reply replies contentions raised by the petitioner in paragraph-3 - to make the record complete and to see that no argument is made to the effect that the Court has missed any submission, the averments made in Paragraph-7 are reproduced:-