- (1.) THIS appeal arises from order dated 14.7.2004 in Complaint No. 182 of 2001 dismissing the complaint.
(2.) WE have heard the learned Advocates for the parties. We have gone through the impugned order. It would appear that Zala Fatehsingh Nathusingh, since deceased, came to be insured under the Janata Personal Accident Policy of the opponent Insurance Company for a period of five years from 14.5.1999 to 13.5.2004. During the subsistence of the policy of insurance in question, the insured had a fall from a Neem tree on 26.1.2001 on account of earthquake in the State of Gujarat. The deceased -insured had gone to the field and had climbed the tree for the purpose of making available Neem leaves to the cattle. When he was up the tree at about 8.45 a.m. the earthquake had taken place. Deceased insured fell from the tree at that relevant point of time. He became unconscious on account of head injury caused due to fall from the tree. The complainant, son of the deceased insured and other people working in the nearby fields rushed to the place of accident and had taken the insured to the nearby Primary Health Centre at Atarsumba. The patient was given necessary primary treatment and was referred to Ahmedabad Civil Hospital as the injury was serious. On their way to Ahmedabad Civil Hospital, it was noticed that the deceased insured succumbed to the injuries and died at 12.30 p.m. on the same day. Upon the complainant submitting claim to the opponent Insurance Company, the Insurance Company repudiated it on the ground that the cause of death was not established to be accident. The complainant was, therefore, before the learned Forum, who, after considering the facts and circumstances of the case came to the conclusion that the deceased insured died natural death as it was act of God that earthquake occurred and he had a fall from the tree. In our considered opinion, this is not a correct finding in the facts and circumstances of the case. Even the injuries that might have been caused due to earthquake would have to be treated as accidental injuries least to say about the injuries caused on account of fall from a tree which on the face of it would amount to accidental injury.
(3.) THE learned Advocate appearing for the opponent Insurance Company however would support the repudiation on the ground that there was no FIR or post -mortem report. In the first place the insured died on way to Ahmedabad Civil Hospital and was, therefore, required to be cremated according to Hindu rites. In the circumstances, it is not necessary that in all cases of accidental deaths lodging of FIR and/or performance of post -mortem would be required. Thus, the repudiation of the claim especially on the ground that there was no FIR and/or post -mortem report cannot be justified New India Assurance Company Limited V. Parulben Yogeshbhai Bhatt and Ors., 2004 1 CPJ 516(Gujarat State Commission). The Divisional Manager, LIC of India V. Y. Ratnamma, 2000 1 CPJ 548, (Andhra Pradesh State Commission), Dr. Meena Raghunath V. Oriental Insurance Company Limited,2004 1 CPR 136, (Union Territory Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh; and Branch Manager, LIC of India v. Rajkumar Mishra, 2000 1 CPJ 113, (UP State Commission)]. In above view of the matter, the complainant would succeed for issuance of following directions: (a) The opponent Insurance Company is directed to pay to the complainant Rs. 1,00,000/ - with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of the complaint till payment and cost quantified at Rs. 2,000/ -. This appeal is allowed while setting aside the impugned order with no further order as to costs. (b) This order shall be complied with by the opponent Insurance Company within 8 (eight) weeks from today.;