IN THE MATTER OF

Rakesh Devi W/o Late Sri Kamal Singh R/o Kashimpur Nagla, Thana Jawa,  Aligarh

(Through: Advocate Deepak Pal)

                                                         V/s

1. Divisional Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India Jeewan Prakash, Masudabad, Aligarh
2. Regional Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India North- Central Regional office, 15/275 Civil Lines, Kanpur

CORAM

 Present:

1. Shri Hasnain Qureshi, President
2. Shri Alok Upadhayay, Member

PRONOUNCED by Shri Hasnain Qureshi, President

JUDGMENT

1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant before this commission for  the following reliefs-

(a)Op be directed to pay to the complainant claim amount Rs.1000000/ .

(b) The Op be directed to pay Rs.11000/ as litigation expesenses.

(c) The Op be directed to pay Rs.50000/ to mental agony.

2. The Complainant stated that the complainant’s husband Kamal Singh was the teacher in education Department and he had purchased a Beema Policy on 2.8.2016. Complainant’s husband had died in an accident and the complainant file death claim before the Op insurance Company which repudiated alleges that the Complainant’s husband was suffering from preexisting disease and he died on account of  accident whereas complainants husband has died in accident.. Op have committed deficiency in service.
3.  Op has submitted in WS that the complainant’s husband obtained the policy concealing the pre exiting disease Typhoid and claim was reputed on the ground of concealment of material fact. It was also stated that complainant has filed a PLA case in the Permanent  Lok Adalat during pendency of this case based on same cause of action. Which was decided on merit on 12.01.2021 granting claim amount Rs.1000000/ (Ten Lakh) and this court has no  jurisdiction.  
4. Complainants have filed his affidavit and papers  in support of his pleadings.  Op has also filed his affidavit and papers  in support of his pleadings
5. We have perused the material available on record and heard the parties counsel.
6. The first question of consideration before us is whether the complainant are entitled to any relief?
7. Complainant has filed this complainant case and a PlA case in the Permanent Lok Adalat on the same cause of action and the PLA case is been decided and now present case is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed . Accordingly complainant is not entitled to any relief. 
8.   The question formulated  against  the complainant .
9.  We hereby dismissed the Complaint.
10. A copy of this judgment be provided to all the parties as per rule as mandated by Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The judgment be uploaded forthwith on the website of the commission for the perusal of the parties.
11. File be consigned to record room along with a copy of this judgment.