Disposed

Kranti and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC3 Jan 2020WRIC/42098/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition filed by the deceased's married daughters challenging Oriental Insurance Company's rejection of their claim under the Mukhyamantri Kisan Evam Sarvhit Beema Yojana. The court ruled that the dispute falls under a specific committee mechanism headed by the District Magistrate and directed the petitioners to approach such authority instead. The petition is finall

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to approach the District Magistrate under the Insurance Scheme; Writ Petition finally disposed.

Kranti and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Consumer Protection | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 37

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 42098 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- Kranti And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishna Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Abhinava Upadhya,J. Hon'ble Ravi Nath Tilhari,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Krishna Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents.

¶6

The petitioners are the married daughters of late Shanker, who was alleged to have insured by the Oriental Insurance Company under the Mukhyamantri Kisan Evam Sarvhit Beema Yojana. The father of the petitioners unfortunately died due to falling from the tree. The Insurance Company rejected the claim of the petitioners on the ground that the married daughters are not dependent on the deceased and, therefore, not entitled to insured amount.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioners, however, submits that there is no person available in the family and the petitioners are the legal heirs of the deceased as per Hindu Succession Act.

¶8

Learned Standing Counsel, however, submits that how the bhumidhari right would devolve has been provided under Section 4 (10) of U.P.Revenue Code that does not include the married daughters.

¶9

Under the Insurance Scheme, in case of any dispute, a Committee headed by the District Magistrate has been constituted to look into such dispute. That being the case, the petitioners' claim having been rejected by the Insurance Company, the petitioners can approach the District Magistrate by filing an application, which may be considered and decided by the District Magistrate in accordance wih law, as far as possible, within a period of four months from the date a certified copy of this order is presented before the authority concerned.

¶10

With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petition stands finally disposed of.

¶11

Order Date :- 3.1.2020 SKM

¶12

(Ravi Nath Tilhari,J.) (Abhinava Upadhya,J.)

Kranti and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kranti and Another v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Malkhan Singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Basheer Khan and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 9 Others

Subhawati Devi Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Sahkari Ganna Vikas Samiti Ltd. and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

M/S. Tasty Dairy Specialities Limited Vs National Highway Authority of India and 3 Others

Shanti Devi Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others