TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court Orders Reexamination of Registration Status, Directs Payment of Rs. 5 Lakh Insurance Claim Due to Fact-Check Failure.</h1> <h3>Rina Rani Rustogi Versus State Of U.P. And 4 Others</h3> The HC directed the respondent authorities to reexamine the registration status of the deceased, confirming that the registration was valid at the time of ... Benefit of Group Insurance purchased by the State for 'Registered Dealer' under VAT - Application for cancellation of registration before the death of registered dealer - Consideration of claim for insurance money being paid to the petitioner - HELD THAT:- It appears that the respondent-authorities have misdirected themselves in not looking at the application dated 18.03.2013 without considering the fact of the pre-existing registration, that stood in the name of the deceased. If the deceased held a registration certificate prior to the occurrence of his death and that registration did not stand cancelled on the date of occurrence of his death, the status of the deceased would remain to be of a registered dealer for the purpose of Group Insurance Policy. Since the respondents have not applied their mind on this aspect of the matter, the writ petition is disposed off with the direction upon the respondent no. 3 to examine the correct facts in light of the observations made and issue appropriate reasoned communication to the petitioner within a period of one month from today. Issues involved:The issues involved in the judgment are the claim for insurance money under the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008, the validity of the deceased's registration as a dealer, and the proper examination of facts by the respondent authorities.Claim for Insurance Money:The petitioner sought insurance money of Rs. 5,00,000 under the Group Insurance Policy for registered dealers. The deceased was claimed to be a registered dealer under the Act at the time of his death, and the petitioner asserted that his registration remained valid until the date of his death.Validity of Registration:The State contended that the deceased had applied to cancel his registration prior to his death, and this application was processed before the occurrence. However, the petitioner disputed this, stating that the registration was surrendered on a later date, and the cancellation was posted on the revenue authorities' website after the death. The petitioner argued that the deceased's registration remained valid until the cancellation date, satisfying the requirements of the Circular and the Group Insurance Policy.Examination of Facts:The Court found that the respondent authorities had not properly considered the status of the deceased as a registered dealer at the time of his death. It was observed that the registration certificate was not cancelled before the death, and the authorities had misdirected themselves by not acknowledging the pre-existing registration. The Court directed the respondent to reexamine the facts, confirm the registration status, issue necessary forms to the insurer, and pay out the insurance money to the petitioner within a specified time frame.Conclusion:The judgment highlighted the importance of verifying the registration status of the deceased dealer before denying the insurance claim. The Court emphasized the need for proper examination of facts by the authorities to ensure the rightful payment of insurance benefits to the petitioner.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
