One, Mrs.Kamlesh Jangid, had taken a life policy on 25.9.1994 in the sum of Rs.3 lakh.  She died on 15.5.1995.  Respondent No.5, the husband of Kamlesh Jangid, filed a claim with the insurance company, which was repudiated on the ground that the insured was suffering from Peptic Ulcer & UTI before filling in the proposal form, which fact was not disclosed in the proposal form.  On 27.9.2002, i.e., after a lapse of 7 years, the husband of the insured, being the nominee, and his children filed a complaint before the District Forum, which was dismissed being time-barred.  In appeal before the State Commission, complainant made a request to amend the original complaint.  State Commission allowed the complaint and remanded the case back to the District Forum to decide the issue of limitation afresh keeping in mind that some of the complainants were minor.  Amended complaint was filed.  District Forum, by its order dated 20.11.2006, citing the provisions of Sections 3,5,6 and 7 of the Limitation Act and Order 32 Rules 1 to 16 of the CPC, came to the conclusion that the father of the children had no authority to give discharge and as per Section 6 of the Limitation Act, the complaint was within limitation.

          Aggrieved against this, the respondent filed an appeal before the State Commission, which has been allowed.  It has been held that Gopal Lal Jangid, the husband of Mrs.Kamlesh Jangid, being the father of the children, was the nominee and he did not file the complaint for a period of 7 years. 

Section 24A of the Consumer Protection Act provides that the complaint can be filed within two years from the date of arising of the cause of action.  In the present case, Kamlesh Jangid died on 15.5.1995 ; the claim was repudiated in the year 1996 and the complaint was filed in the year 2002.  By no stretch of imagination, insured amount could become an HUF property.  Wife got herself insured for Rs.3 lakh, which was to be paid to the nominee.  Claim filed by the nominee was repudiated in the year 1996 and the complaint was filed on behalf of the nominee along with his minor children, who were claiming through him, in the year 2002, which was clearly barred by limitation.  No merits.  Dismissed.