BEFORE A.P STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION AT HYDERABAD
F.A.No.236/2012 AGAINST C.C.NO.202/2011
Between:
1. The Branch Manager
LIC of India, Mahabubabad Branch Office
Mahabubabad Post & Mandal
Warangal District.
2. The Divisional Manager,
Life Insurance Corporation of India
Divisional office, Jeevan prakash
Near Ambedkar, Balasamudram,
Hanamkonda, Warangal District
And
Kolipaka Renuka, W/o Late Babu
Aged 26 years
R/o H. No. 12-222,
Thorrur post & Mandal,
Warangal District
Counsel for the Appellants
Counsel for the Respondent
QUORUM:
SRI THOTA ASHOK KUMAR, HON’BLE MEMBER
TUESDAY, THE NINETEENTH
Oral Order
01.This is an appeal preferred by the unsuccessful opposite parties against the order dated 06.01.2012in CC 59/2012 on the file of the District Consumer Forum, Warangal. For convenience sake, the parties arrayed in the complaint are as under :
02.The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant who is the wife and nominee of the deceased policy holder Kollapaka Babu who obtained Market Plus LIC policy bearing No. 688257173 from OP.1 for an assured sum of Rs.50,000/- and Rs.50,000/- towards accidental benefit nd which date the policy was in lapsed condition due to nonpayment of half yearly premium due on 09/2009 and hence the opposite parties are not liable for payment of the sum assured except the fund value available to the credit of the policy and that
03.The opposite parties 1 and 2 filed written version disputing the claim of the complainant while admitting that the deceased Kollapaka Babu had taken the Market Plus policy from OP.1 to be revived on 27.01.2009 and that
04.The complainant filed her evidence affidavit and marked
05.After hearing both sides and considering the material available on record, the District Forum allowed the complaint and directed the opposite parties to pay Rs.50,000/- towards sum assured and Rs.50,000/- towards accidental benefit in total Rs.one lakh along with interest @7.5% PA from the date of filing of the complaint ie 20.04.2011 till date of realization and costs of Rs.500/- towards costs.
06.Feeling aggrieved with the said orders, the opposite party preferred this appeal on several grounds and mainly contended that if cause of death is jaundice accidental benefit cannot be claimed and that the complainant fabricated documents to prove that the date of death of the policy holder is 25.08.2009 though he died actually on 24.1.2010 due to jaundice and that the District Forum did not appreciate the said aspects in correct manner and arrived at a wrong conclusion and thus prayed to allow the appeal and set aside the impugned order.
07.Heard the counsel for the appellants/opposite parties and no arguments were advanced on behalf of the respondent/complainant.
08.Now the point for consideration is whether the order of the District Forum is vitiated either in law or on facts?
09. There is no dispute that the deceased life assured viz. Kollapaka Babu had taken Market Plus LIC policy bearing No. 688257173 from OP.1 commenced from 27.03.2008 during his life for an assured sum of Rs.50,000/- with accidental benefit for the like sum by paying a premium of Rs.5,000/- and that the policy was commenced from the said date According to the complainant, he died on 25.08.2009 due to jaundice whereas, the Insurance Company contended that he died on 25.10.2010 by which date the policy was lapsed for non-payment of half yearly premium which fell due in the month of September, 2009. The complainant relied upon Ex. A-2, death certificate, said to have been issued by incharge Panchayat Secretary of Gram Panchyat, Thorrur, wherein, date of death of the life assured is shown as 25.08.2009and that such death was registered at the office of Gram Panchayat on 19.10.2009. Ops filed Ex. B4, copy of relevant page of Register of Births and Deaths of the said Gram Panchayat th.
10. In the result, the appeal is allowed setting aside the order of the District Forum. No order as to costs in the appeal.
Member
