Mohinder Pal Singh, deceased husband of the petitioner No.1 (complainant No.1) and father of petitioners No. 2 & 3 (complainants No.2 & 3) was having two credit cards of HSBC Bank (respondent herein) in his own name vide HSBC INTL Gold-V Credit Card No.4384 5999 1205 4557 and another HSBC Gold Credit Card No.4384 5999 1554 2731 for which he was issued two insurance policies covering various insurance benefits, including that of personal accident death claim to the tune of Rs.4 Lakhs in case of death in an air accident and Rs.4 Lakhs in other accidents. Shri Mohinder Pal Singh Sodhi expired in a road accident on 11.6.2007 of which FIR No.218 dated 11.6.2007 was registered against the driver of the offending truck at Manimajra, UT Chandigarh. Postmortem was conducted on 12.6.2007 by the doctors at PGI, Chandigarh. Petitioners lodged their claim with the respondent of Rs.8 Lakhs (i.e. Rs.4 Lakhs each on account of two insurance policies) but the same was not settled, aggrieved against which petitioners filed the complaint before the District Forum. -3- Tata AIG Life Insurance Co. Ltd. (opposite party No.1) took a preliminary objection that the petitioners did not have any locus standi to file the complaint against it as no premium was paid by the petitioner to it. Respondent (opposite party No.2) entered appearance and filed its statement. It was averred that insured Mohinder Pal Singh Sodhi had only one credit card in his name. Second card was in the name of J.P.S. Sodhi. Petitioners were not entitled to receive any compensation against the card issued in the name of J.P.S. Sodhi. Insurance cover was available only in the case of non-accidental death but since the insured died in a road accident, he was not covered in the terms and conditions of the policy. It was further stated that initially a free personal accident insurance coverage was provided on the said credit card but the same was withdrawn w.e.f. 14.1.2007 and as such there was no insurance coverage on the credit card after 14.1.2007. This fact was duly intimated to the card holder. Withdrawal of the insurance cover was also conveyed to the card holder through bill statement for the period from 14.1.2006 to 13.1.2007. This fact was never challenged by the insured during his lifetime. Therefore, complainants cannot challenge the withdrawal of insurance cover w.e.f. 14.1.2007 after the death of the insured. -4- District Forum dismissed the complaint, aggrieved against which complainants filed appeal before the State Commission. State Commission came to the conclusion that the petitioners are not entitled to claim the compensation against the credit card issued in the name of J.P.S. Sodhi. With regard to the card of the insured M.P.S. Sodhi, State Commission came to the conclusion that the insurance cover against other card had been withdrawn w.e.f. 14.1.2007. This fact was conveyed to the card holder through bill statement for the period from 14.1.2006 to 13.1.2007. Insured-card holder never challenged the withdrawal of the insurance cover during his lifetime. The petitioners could not challenge the withdrawal of the insurance cover w.e.f. 14.1.2007 after the death of the deceased. Being aggrieved the petitioners have filed the present revision petition. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners gives up claim against the card issued in the name of J.P.S. Sodhi and does not press the same. He contends that the respondent is guilty of unfair trade practice. We do not find substance in this submission. The insurance cover given by virtue of the credit card issued to Mohinder Pal Singh -5- Sodhi (deceased) was withdrawn during his lifetime on 14.1.2007. Fact regarding withdrawal of the insurance cover was also conveyed to Mohinder Pal Singh Sodhi through bill statement for the period from 14.1.2006 to 13.1.2007. During his lifetime, the insured did not challenge the withdrawal of the insurance cover w.e.f. 14.1.2007. Petitioners after the death of the insured could not challenge the withdrawal of the insurance cover w.e.f. 14.1.2007. We agree with the view taken by the State Commission. Dismissed. | 
