MR. PRAVAT KUMAR PADHI, PRESIDENT:-
Complainants are wife and son of the deceased Policy holder bearing Policy No. 585374801 and 589409818 dt. 21.07.2004 and 28.02.2004. During currency of Policy Life assured Saroj Ku. Kundu expired on dt. 10.12.2013 at Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai leaving behind Complainants and parent. But the father of Complainant expired on 27.12.2015 as such rest three persons i.e. mother, wife and son remained as Class-1 heir of deceased Policy holder.
The OpNo.2 i.e, Mother as Complainant had filed C.C.Case No. 84/2017 before this Commission which has been disposed off. However the order & direction passed in C.C.Case No. 84/2017 has already been complied by the Op No.1.
The facts being undisputed the OpNo.1 should have released the 2/3rd claim amount in favour of the widow of deceased and the minor son. But it is the plea of Counsel of OpNo.1 that the Complainant has not approached properly for which there is no latches on part of OpNo.1.
We have heard the contention of both the parties. The Policy was procured in 2004 and Life assured expired on dt. 10.12.2013 and 1/3 rd of Policy amount has already been released in favour of OpNo.2 i.e, mother-in-law of Complainant and mother of deceased life assured and rest 2/3rd is kept pending with OpNo.1. It is undisputed fact that Complainants are Class-1 legal heir and entitle to get 2/3rd share of the Policy.
Therefore going by the order passed by this Commission, we direct to Op No.1 to release 2/3rd of the Policy amount with same rate of interest as has been paid to Op No.2 from the date of death till date of payment.
with the aforesaid observation & direction the C.C.Case No. 64/2022 is disposed off and no order as to cost.
Issue extract of the order to the parties for compliance.
Pronounced the Open Commission on this the 28th day of June, 2023.
I, agree.
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER PRESIDENT
