NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/744/2010

SATYANARAIN TAILOR - Complainant(s)

Versus

LIC OF INDIA LTD. & ANR. - Opp.Party(s)

MR. BHARTESH GOYAL

07 May 2010

ORDER


NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHIREVISION PETITION NO. 744 OF 2010
(Against the Order dated 28/10/2009 in Appeal No. 491/2004 of the State Commission Rajasthan)
1. SATYANARAIN TAILORR/o. Bada Bazar, Opposite Silai Kendra Post Sambhar LakeJaipurRajasthan ...........Petitioner(s)
Versus
1. LIC OF INDIA LTD. & ANR.Through Branch Manager, Sambhar LakeJaipurRajasthan2. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.Through Divisional Manager, Divisional Office, 'Jeevan Prakash' Ranade Marg, P.B. No. 2AjmerRajasthan ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. GUPTA ,PRESIDING MEMBERHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. BATTA ,MEMBER
For the Petitioner :NEMO
For the Respondent :NEMO

Dated : 07 May 2010
ORDER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

In support of the life assured suffering from epilepsy, the State Commission has relied on the statement of the life assured herself made to the police in the proceedings under Section 174 Cr.P.C. and the history recorded on the bed-head ticket of the hospital where she was admitted for treatment of burn injuries. State Commission has also taken note of the fact that three successive policies were purchased by the life assured and she died within a short span of the purchase of last policy. Having heard Shri Goyal and having considered the said piece of evidence, we do not find any illegality or jurisdictional error in the impugned order warranting interference in revisional jurisdiction under Section 21 (b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Revision petitions are, therefore, dismissed.


......................JK.S. GUPTAPRESIDING MEMBER
......................JR.K. BATTAMEMBER