Per Shri P.N. Kashalkar – Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member:

(1)                This is an appeal filed by the original Complainant whose complaint was dismissed by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, District Kolhapur by passing following order:

“As the claims of the Complainant are paid by the O.P. and the O.P. has filed pursis to that effect, the complaint is disposed of as there is no deficiency in service on part of the O.P.”

Against this order the original Complainant has filed this appeal.  Her contention is that in respect of death claim of her son – Mahesh P. Kashid, (her son’s life was insured with the Respondent Insurance Company), she had filed consumer complaint.  Upto 17.08.1998 Respondent had not given death claim of the said Appellant of `1,00,000/-.  Therefore, she filed consumer complaint and consumer complaint was dismissed as aforesaid by the District Forum, Kolhapur.  She filed appeal since she had claimed interest @18% per annum on the amount of `1,00,000/- from 17.02.1997 upto 17.08.1998.  The amount of interest claimed by her was `24,000/-.  She also claimed `30,000/- towards expenditure incurred in filing the consumer complaint and therefore her total claim was of `1,27,000/- and further interest on that amount @18% was claimed by the Appellant by fling this appeal.  However, we are finding that after filing of the complaint L.I.C. was pleased to issue cheque of `1,02,000/- during the pendancy of the complaint on 24.06.1999.  The complaint was filed in the year 1999 itself.  It was filed somewhere on 10.11.1998 and within 6/7 months this amount was paid to the Complainant as the pursis filed by Advocate on record on behalf of the Complainant.

(2)                When during the pendancy of the complaint whole death claim was paid.  The District Forum rightly held that the complaint was liable to be dismissed since L.I.C. had paid amount towards the insurance claim lodged by the Complainant by giving cheque of `1,02,000/-.  In our view, the order passed by the District Forum is correct and it is sustainable in law and therefore, there appears to be no substance in the appeal filed by the original Complainant.  Hence, we pass the following order:

O  R  D  E  R

              (i)     Appeal filed by the Complainant stands dismissed.

            (ii)     No order as to costs.

          (iii)     Inform the parties accordingly.

Pronounced on 5^th July, 2011.