LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION Vs. SHAKUNTALA DEVI
LAWS(RAJCDRC)-2006-1-2
RAJASTHAN STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Decided on January 10,2006

LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION Appellant
VERSUS
SHAKUNTALA DEVI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.)THIS appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as 1986 Act ) against the order dated 16.1.2003 passed by the learned District Forum, Dholpur whereby the complaint of the complainant -respondent was allowed.
(2.)THE brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that one Kailash Chandra Agarwal had taken two non -medical life policies with accident benefit, one on 28.8.1998 and the other on 28.5.1989 for Rs. 50,000 each. The complainant Smt. Shakuntala Devi was his nominee. Under this policy, on death of the life assured caused by bodily injury resulting solely and directly from the accident, the appellants were under an obligation to pay an additional sum equal to the sum assured. The complainant alleged that the said Kailash Chandra Agarwal met with an accident on 29.3.1999 and died on 15.6.1999 by septicemia. A FIR of the accident was lodged by her son in P.S. Sainya on 2.9.1999. The complainant informed the appellants about the death of the assured and the appellants paid the amount under the policies to the complainant without any delay. The appellants, however, rejected the claim of the complainant about accident benefit on 2.5.2000 on the ground that the death of the assured had not taken place by accident. The complainant filed a complaint in the Forum below claiming the amount and damages.
(3.)THE appellant filed a reply in the Forum below that the insured had not died on account of any accident. The appellant submitted that for some injury, the respondent was admitted in a hospital in Agra on 29.3.1999 and he was discharged from the hospital on 26.4.1999 after the treatment. Thereafter, the deceased died of septicemia on 15.6.1999 and as such his nominee is not entitled to benefit of any accident. The other claim of the complainant was promptly paid by the appellant.
After hearing both the parties, the learned District Forum passed the impugned order and allowed the claim of the respondent.



Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.