- (1.) THE opposite party in O.P. No.73/2002 on the file of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Nagercoil is the appellant herein. The case of the complainant was as follows: He was employed as a driver with the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation. He had availed a life policy for Rs. 50,000. Under the said policy, apart from the benefits payable in the event of death, cover was granted for permanent total disablement due to injury sustained in an accident. The complainant made a claim for accident benefit for the injury sustained in the accident on 7.11.1998 which had resulted in fracture of both bones of his left leg. The Medical Board recommended for invalidation stating that the complainant was not fit to continue as driver. He was retrenched from service. The complainant approached the opposite party to disburse the disability benefit amount. Necessary application was given in person. Still the opposite party was reluctant to consider the claim of the complainant. Hence, the complaint came to be filed.
(2.) THE opposite party resisted the complaint contending inter alia as follows: There was no proof of retrenchment of the complainant. The policy was issued on 28.9.1998 for a sum of Rs. 50,000 under Plan and Term 14 -15 and it would mature only on 28.9.2013. The disability claim lodged by the complainant was under the consideration of the opposite party. They had sought proof of the life assured's retrenchment from service that on such proof of the claim could be considered. Deficiency would arise only in the event of non -consideration of the claim. The certificate issued was manipulated and reconstructed to suit the case of the complainant as if the percentage was 100. Only if the disability was full, total and permanent, there could be payment.
(3.) THE District Forum accepted the case of the complainant and by order dated 29.1.2003 directed the opposite party to pay the sum assured plus vested bonus as provided in the insurance policy, to pay a sum of Rs. 5,000 towards compensation and a sum of Rs. 2,500 as costs within one month from the date of this order. It is as against that the present appeal has been filed. We heard the Counsel on both sides and we suggested to the opposite party to have the matter settled. After taking instructions, the learned Counsel Mr. Raghavan reported to us. On the basis of his representation and with the consent of the learned Counsel for the complainant we pass the following order: The instalments payable became due from 7.11.1998. The complainant shall be paid the instalments in a lumsum from 7.11.1998 up -to -date within a period of eight weeks from today. The balance instalments shall be paid every month to the complainant. It is to be noted that the policy matures for payment only in the year 2013. In view of what is stated above, we are not going into the question as to the percentage of disability and whether the complainant would be entitled to payment as directed by the District Forum. The order of the District Forum is modified as indicated above. The appeal is disposed of as indicated above. No costs.;