RELIANCE LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD. vs REKHABEN NARESHBHAI RATHOD

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

RELIANCE LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD. – Appellant
Versus
REKHABEN NARESHBHAI RATHOD – Respondent

Advocates:
PAREKH & CO.

ITEM NO.47 REGISTRAR COURT. 2 SECTION XVII

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

BEFORE THE REGISTRAR MR. M V RAMESH

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 14312/2015

RELIANCE LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANR. Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

REKHABEN NARESHBHAI RATHOD Respondent(s)

(with appln. (s) for exemption from filing official English

translation and permission to file volume-ii and interim relief and

office report)

Date : 06/05/2016 This petition was called on for hearing today.

For Petitioner(s) Ms.Anubha Gupta,Adv.

M/s. Parekh & Co.,Adv.

For Respondent(s)

Mr. Snehasish Mukherjee,Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

O R D E R

The sole respondent has failed to file the counter affidavit

within the period stipulated under the rules. However, Ld.counsel

has stated that he will file the counter affidavit during the

course of the day. If the same is filed today, the offi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

Judicial Analysis

1. INDNCDRC00000007194: This case is explicitly cited as a precedent and is associated with a 2019 (2019) 6 SCC 175 case, which is a Supreme Court decision. The listing references the case as a reiteration of principles related to consumer contracts and claims handling, with no indication of it being overruled or reversed. Therefore, no evidence suggests it has been treated as bad law; it remains authoritative.

2. INDSCDRC00000009170: This case is cited for its principles and references a Supreme Court judgment in Reliance Life Insurance. There is no indication that it has been overruled or negatively treated; it appears to be a valid citation.

3. INDSCDRC00000010775: The case emphasizes the need for full disclosure and references multiple judgments, including Reliance Life Insurance Co. Ltd. v. ... and the Supreme Court. The treatment pattern suggests it is cited for its principles, with no signs of being overruled or criticized.

*Conclusion:* Based on the provided data, none of the listed cases explicitly show signs of being overruled, reversed, or treated as bad law. They are primarily cited for their principles and are referenced in subsequent judgments without indication of negative treatment.

IND_NCDRC_NATIONAL_RP_1870_2019, IND_NCDRC_NATIONAL_RP_1869_2019, IND_NCDRC_NATIONAL_RP_1872_2019, IND_NCDRC_NATIONAL_RP_1874_2019, IND_NCDRC_NATIONAL_RP_1871_2019, IND_NCDRC_NATIONAL_RP_1873_2019, IND_NCDRC_NATIONAL_FA_998_2019, NCDRC00000006892: These cases reiterate principles related to utmost good faith, full disclosure, misrepresentation, and non-disclosure in insurance contracts. They are cited for their doctrinal principles and have not been indicated as overruled or criticized.

INDSCDRC00000009170, INDSCDRC00000010775: These are cited for their principles related to consumer contracts and the importance of full disclosure, with references to Supreme Court judgments, indicating they are treated as authoritative and consistent with current law.

IND_NCDRC_NATIONAL_RP_2190_2018: The treatment pattern here is not explicitly detailed. It discusses agency and knowledge transfer, citing a Supreme Court case, but there is no indication whether this case has been overruled, criticized, or upheld. Its treatment remains ambiguous based on the provided list.

The list does not specify whether any case has been explicitly overruled or criticized, but the absence of such language suggests that all cases are considered good law within the context of this list.

RELIANCE LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD. – AppellantVersusREKHABEN NARESHBHAI RATHOD – Respondent

Judicial Analysis

RELIANCE LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD. – Appellant
Versus
REKHABEN NARESHBHAI RATHOD – Respondent