REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

JUPITER GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. Appellant

V/S

RAJAGOPALAN Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

COMMONWEALTH V. ALGER [REFERRED TO]
REGINA (JOHN M' EVOY) V. DUBLIN CORPORATION [REFERRED TO]
UNION COLLIARY COMPANY OF BRITISH COLOMBIA V. BRYDEN [REFERRED TO]
MAYOR OF WESTMINSTER V. L.& N.W.RLY. CO. [REFERRED TO]
MUGLER V. STATE OF KANSAS [REFERRED TO]
THE KING V. ELECTRICITY COMMISSIONERS [REFERRED TO]
REX V. LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE OF THE CHURCH ASSEMBLY [REFERRED TO]
PATTERSON V. DISTRICT COMMISSIONER OF ACCRA [REFERRED TO]
THE KING V. LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL [REFERRED TO]
NAZIR AHMAD CASE [REFERRED TO]
KAMESHWAR SINGH V. PROVINCE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
NAKKUDA ALI V. M.F.DE S.JAYARATNE [REFERRED TO]
HAMID HASAN V. BANWARI LAL [REFERRED TO]
A K GOPALAN VS. STATE OF MADRAS OPPOSITE PARTY; UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
PROVINCE OF BOMBAY VS. KHUSHALDAS S ADVANI SINCE DECEASED AND AFTER HIM HIS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE A GOVINDRAM KHUSHALDAS AND B RAMCHAND KHUSHALDAS [REFERRED TO]
CHARANJIT LAL CHOWDHARY VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
SREE MEENAKSHI MILLS LTD VS. PROVINCIAL TEXTILE COMMISSIONER, MADRAS [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order disposes of Civil Miscellaneous (Writs) Nos. 17, 18 and 19 of 1951.

(2.) Briefly summarised, the material facts are these. On the 17th of February, 1951, respondent No. 1 gave notice under Section 52A of the Indian Insurance Act, 1938, hereinafter referred to as the Act, to the Jupiter General Insurance Company, Limited, Bombay, the Empire of India Life Assurance Company, Ltd., Bombay, and the Tropical Insurance Company, Ltd., New Delhi, hereinafter referred to as the companies, that he had reason to believe that the companies were acting in a manner likely to be prejudicial to the interests of holders of life insurance policies of those Companies and informing them that he would hear them on the 26th of February, 1951, in his office in New Delhi, and unless satisfactory cause was shown he would make a report to respondent No. 2 for the appointment of an Administrator to manage the affairs of the companies. Grounds for action under Section 52A of the Act were stated in the notices issued to the companies.

(3.) On the 17th of February, 1951, the Controller informed the companies that the hearing On the 26th of February, 1951, would be at Bombay instead at New Delhi.

Click here to view full judgment.

JUPITER GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. RAJAGOPALAN

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address