L I C OF INDIA Vs. KOMAL ASHOK KEWALRAMANI
LAWS(MHCDRC)-2013-10-1
MAHARASHTRA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Decided on October 10,2013

L I C OF INDIA Appellant
VERSUS
Komal Ashok Kewalramani Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.)THIS appeal takes an exception to an order dated 20/09/2008 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Thane in consumer complaint no.CC/07/224.
(2.)FACTS in brief leading to this appeal can be summarized as under: -
The deceased wife of the complainant had taken an insurance policy bearing no.923008692 under the Plan and Table No.75 -20, 20 years Money Bank policy with profits and with accidental benefit from the opponent. The policy was proposed on 25/03/2004 and the period of the policy commenced from 26/03/2004 to 26/03/2024. Insured amount of the policy was Rs. 5,05,000/ - and the premium payable was Rs. 9,557/ - quarterly. The policy holder -Ashok Tarachand Kevalramani died on 10/12/2004. The complainant being wife and nominee of the policy holder had filed a claim with the opponent. However, opponent had repudiated the claim on 15/02/2006 stating therein that the deceased has not paid the quarterly premium due in September 2004. The complainant had contended that the deceased had gone to pay the premium amount. However, the officers of the opponent had told him that as per the status report, the premium has already been credited. Alleging that repudiation of the valid claim is a deficiency on the part of the opponent, complainant filed consumer complaint praying that the opponent be held as deficient in service and be directed to pay an amount of Rs. 5,05,000/ - along with interest of 18% p.a., Rs. 1 lakh for compensation and Rs. 45,000/ - as costs.

(3.)THE opponent had contested the complaint by filing written version admitting therein that they have issued the policy and the same was valid from 26/03/2004 till 26/03/2024. However, the opponents have claimed that on the death of the deceased, the policy was in a lapsed condition due to non payment of quarterly premium due in September 2004. The opponent further contended that there was a mistake whereby the opponents have confirmed the receipt of September's premium in the status report. However, this mistake was committed by the agent. They also stated that the wrong payment of the premium amount was cancelled. They further contended that the deceased has not honestly paid the premium. They have drawn our attention to the order passed by the Ombudsman, wherein the Ombudsman has observed that if at all the deceased had gone to LIC to pay the premium which he knew that he had not paid the premium and policy was wrongly showing the same as paid, he could have approached the Branch Manager or the Policy Servicing department for accepting the premium on deposit basis in which case LIC would have accepted the same. There is no document on record to prove that at least he made an attempt to pay the premium on due date in order to keep his policy in force. Therefore, the opponents have prayed that the complaint may pleased be dismissed as there is no deficiency in service on their part.
District Forum after going through the complaint, written version filed by the opponent, evidence filed by both the parties on affidavits and pleading of their advocates, allowed the complaint partly directing the opponent to pay an amount of Rs. 5,05,000/ - to the complainant for an insurance policy no.923008692 with interest @ 8% p.a. and costs of Rs. 10,000/ -.

;


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