Wife of the petitioner, who was a teacher, had taken three salary saving schemes policies.  The premium was being deducted from her salary through employer who used to remit the same to the insurance company.  She died on 27.9.2000, pursuant to which the claim was lodged by the petitioner being the nominee which was

repudiated by the insurance company on the ground that the three polices were lying in a lapsed condition.  Being aggrieved petitioner filed the complaint before the District Forum seeking a direction to the insurance company to pay the sum of Rs.2,63,000/- towards the  settlement of the claim along with interest @ 12% p.a. along with compensation of Rs.10,000/- and litigation costs of Rs.20,000/-.

          District Forum by a majority decision of 2:1 dismissed the complaint.

          Not satisfied with the order passed by the District Forum, petitioner filed the appeal before the State Commission, which has been allowed.  The State Commission relying upon the two judgments of Supreme Court in “Delhi Electric Supply Undertaking vs. Basanti Devi, AIR 2000 SC 43 and Chairman, Life Insurance Corporation vs. Rajiv Bhaskar, AIR 2005 SC 3087 has held that the payment of premium by deducting it from the salary of the employee is an issue between the employer and LIC.  Though, the employer is not an agent of the LIC qua its regulations, he has implied authority to act as agent of LIC in view of Section 186 of the Contract Act.  Respondents were directed to pay Rs.2,63,000/- towards the sum assured along with admissible benefits by 30.9.2006, failing which they were made liable to pay the interest on the principal amount @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the complaint.

          Respondents in pursuance to the direction issued by the State Commission paid the principal amount of Rs.2,63,000/- to the petitioner on 07.9.2006 i.e. within the period granted by the State Commission.

          Complainant has filed the present revision petition seeking interest.  According to him, he had been deprived of use of his money.  We find substance in this submission.  The petitioner could not be denied the interest on the amount, which had become due.  Accordingly, the revision petition is allowed.   Respondents are directed to pay interest @ 7% p.a. on the insured amount from the date of filing of the complaint till the date of payment, i.e. 07.9.2006.