High CourtsDivision Bench(2020) 02 PAT CK 0058

Pankaj Kumar vs Life Insurance Corporation Of India And Ors

Patna High Court · Decided on 17 February 2020

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sanjay Karol, CJ · S. Kumar, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Letters Patent Appeal No. 1271 Of 2018, Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 7116 Of 2013

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

19 paragraphs · 321 words

Sanjay Karol, CJ

Re: I.A. No. 6998 of 2018

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents.

We have considered the affidavit filed in support of the delay condonation application and we find that sufficient cause has been shown to condone the

delay in filing the appeal. The delay is condoned and the appeal shall be treated to be within time.

I.A. No. 6998 of 2018 stands allowed accordingly.

Re: L.P.A. No. 1271 of 2018

The instant appeal, assailing the order dated 08.05.2017 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 7116 of 2013, titled as Pankaj

Kumar Vs. The Life Insurance Corporation of India & Ors., was filed on 05.09.2018.

The Registry pointed out defects vide office note dated 04.10.2018. Thereafter, none bothered to remove the defects or process the matter in any

manner. The matter was lying in the Registry unattended. It is only when none bothered to remove the defects, despite the order dated 03.12.2018

passed by the Lawazima Board, the matter now stands listed before this Court for the first time.

Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents.

The instant appeal has been preferred assailing the order dated 08.05.2017 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 7116 of

2013, titled as Pankaj Kumar Vs. The Life Insurance Corporation of India & Ors., whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition.

The present appeal, is totally misconceived, in fact an abuse of process of law. The Writ Court dismissed the petition on the ground that the petitioner

had already exhausted his remedies in accordance with law and having failed before every foras, filed the writ petition with an endeavour to

overreach the judgments passed by the authorities.

The present appeal, is totally misconceived, and as such, dismissed, for we do not find any illegality in the impugned order.