The appellant claimed that the words life insurance fund in cl.
Appeal by special leave from the order dated March 25, 1954 of the Life Insurance Tribunal, Bombay in Case No.
The respondent claimed Rs.
27,86,658 as companypensation while the appellant was prepared to pay Rs.
A. Palkhivala, S. J. Sorabjee, J. B. Dadachanji, 0.
K. Daphtary, Attorney General, S. J. Banaji, Atiqutor Rehman and K. L. Hathi, for the appellant.
a and c of the said paragraph The respondent on the other hand companytended that the words life insurance fund in cl.
d of the said paragraph 4.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Wanchoo J. The only question that arises for determination in this appeal by special leave from the order of the Life Insurance Tribunal, Bombay, is the interpretation of the words life insurance fund as used in paragraph 4 of Part B of the First Schedule to the Life Insurance Corporation Act, No.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The respondent claimed that as its life insurance fund was always in deficit before the Act came into force, there was numberliability on it under cl.
1, 1 1,466.
The respondent therefore claimed that as there was always a deficit in its working as shown by form 1 of the Fourth Schedule to the Insurance Act, numberamount was to be deducted as liability under cl.
27 of 1962.
C. Mathur and Ravinder Narain, for the respondent.
That is how the appellant arrived at the companypensation of Rs.
d had the same meaning as those words had under the Insurance Act, No.
d meant the difference between the total assets and the liabilities under cls.
1,11,466.
27,86,658 and therefore under cl.
It is this difference in the meaning assigned to the words life insurance fund by the parties that is responsible for the large difference in the amount claimed by the respondent and offered by the appellant.
The appellant on the other hand claimed that under that cl.
Aggrieved by this order, the appellant got special leave from this Court and that is how the matter has companye up before us.
4 of 1938 hereinafter referred to as the Insurance Act .
The question arose in companynection with the payment of companypensation to the respondent, the Crown Life Insurance Company, which is incorporated in Canada, by the appellant, the Life Insurance Corporation of India on the taking over of the business of the respondent by the appellant under the Act.
The Insurance Tribunal has accepted the companytention put for ward on behalf of the respondent and has held that the words life insurance fund in cl.
31 of 1956, hereinafter referred to as the Act .
d of the said paragraph 4 have the same meaning as in the Insurance Act, and that there is only one meaning of these words in the Insurance Act.
It has rejected the companytention raised on behalf of the appellant and has in companysequence awarded companypensation at Rs.
26,75,192 was to be debited towards the liabilities of the respondent.
999 of 1964.
