Pankaj Kumar v. The Life Insurance Corporation Of India Through The Chairman And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Review No.256 of 2017 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 7116 of 2013 ====================================================== Pankaj Kumar, Son of Shri Krishna Singh, Resident Of Village - Kinjar, Police Station - Kinjar, District - Arwal (Jehanabad) at present resident Of Flat No. A-035, Jagat Amrawati Apartment, Bailey Road, Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Life Insurance Corporation of India through the Chairman, Jeevan Bima Marg, P.B. No. 19953 Mumbai- 400021.
2. The Chairman, Life Insurance Corporation of India, Jeevan Bima Marg, P.B. No. 19953 Mumbai- 400021.
3. The Senior Branch Manager, Branch No. 1/C. Life Insurance Corporation of India, 60-61, Khan Market, New Delhi- 110003.
4. The Zonal Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India, Jeevan Bharti Building, P.S. No. 630, Connaught Place, New Delhi- 110001. .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Prashant Kashyap, Advocate For the LIC : Mr. Nilonjom Chatterjee, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 01-08-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the Life Insurance Corporation of India.
In the present application, the petitioner seeks review of the order dated 08.05.2017 passed in CWJC No.7116 of 2013 by this Court dismissing the writ application, whereby and where under he has prayed for payment of two insurance policies.
Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner
Patna High Court C. REV. No.256 of 2017 (12) dt.01-08-2018 2/2 and the learned counsel for the Life Insurance Corporation of India, this Court is of the view that the present application under review is but an appeal in disguise and would amount to rehearing of the writ application, which is not permissible in law. Moreover, liberty has already been accorded to the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy after the disposal of the C.B.I. case. Thus, this Court does not find any merit in the review application as there is no error apparent on the face of the record.
The review application thus stands dismissed. (Anjana Mishra, J) PNM U