Case Details

Citation(s)
2003 SLG 2929 2003 SLD 2929 2003 CLD 966
Lahore High Court
Civil Revision No.2584 of 2002, decision dated: 10-01-2003.
CH. IJAZ AHMAD, J
C.M. Latif for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondent.

STATE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF PAKISTAN through General ManageR

VS

. ABDUL SATTAR KHAN

Law:

Section:

(a) Insurance-------Premiums paid to Insurance company, suit for recovery of---Plea of Insurance company was that as per Cl. (5) of Insurance Policy, no written request for converting insurance policy into a paid-up policy was made by insured, thus, his policy had lapsed automatically---Trial Court dismissed suit, but Appellate Court decreed the same---Validity---Clause (5) of Insurance Policy revealed that condition of written request was not mandatory as no penal consequences were prescribed therefore---Contract between parties, thus, could not become void---Appellate Court had passed impugned after applying its independent mind and properly appreciating evidence---Insurance Company had failed to point out any non-reading or misreading of evidence by Appellate Court or violation of principle laid down by superior Courts---High Court dismissed petition in circumstances. Messrs S.M. Abdullah & Sons, Karachi v. Messrs Crescent Star Insurance Co. Ltd. 1993 MLD 1239 ref. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----S.115---Error of law or fact committed by Subordinate Court---High Court not empowered to interfere except after satisfying itself upon certain matters---Such matters and conditions highlighted. Section 115, C.P.C., empowers High Court to satisfy itself upon three matters: (a) that order of Subordinate Court is within its jurisdiction; (b) that the case is one in which the Court ought to exercise jurisdiction, and (c) that in exercising jurisdiction, the Court has not acted illegally; that is, in breach of some provision of law or with material irregularity, that is, by committing some error of procedure in the course of the trial, which is material in that it may have affected the ultimate decision. If High Court is satisfied upon these three matters, it has no power to interfere because it differs, however profoundly, from the conclusion of Subordinate Court upon questions of fact or law. N.S. Venkatagiri Ayyangar and another v. The Hindu Religious Endowments Board, Madras PLD 1949 PC 26 and Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Lahore v. Syed Khalid Mahmood 1985 CLC 657 fol. (c) Insurance--- ----Clause (s) of Insurance Policy giving rise…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492