- (1.) Two writ petitions involving similar issues are taken up for hearing analogously.
(2.) The petitioner essentially seeks a declaration that the repudiation of the claim under a contract for insurance is wrong and that the petitioner is entitled to the amount assessed by the Surveyor, at the least.
(3.) W.P. No. 1135 of 2015 is taken up for consideration first. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that, the repudiation is contained in the writing dated April 11, 2013 issued by the insurance company. He submits that, taking every statement made in the letter of repudiation to be true and correct, although not admitting the same to be so, then also the repudiation is ex facie contrary to the materials available on record and, therefore, cannot be sustained. He submits that, since there is a repudiation and apparently a dispute has been sought to be raised by the insurance company with regard to the claim for insurance, by the letter of repudiation dated April 11, 2013, the Writ Court is not denuded of its jurisdiction to grant the reliefs to the petitioner. He relies upon 2004 Volume 3 Supreme Court Cases page 553 (ABL International Ltd. & Anr. v. Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. & Ors.) in support of his contentions.;