aKERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

VAZHUTHACAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

APPEAL 241/2010

JUDGMENT DATED: 27.5.2010

PRESENT

JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU            : PRESIDENT

SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA                        : MEMBER

Divisional Manager,                                      :APPELLANT

New India Assurance Co.,

Trivandrum.

(Thomas P.Jacob)

       Vs.

1. N.Bhadran,                                              : RESPONDENTS

    Amritha Bhavan,  Madamon,

    Perunadu, Vadasserikara,

    Pathanamthitta District.

2. Remani Wife of Bhadran,

        -do- do-

3.  Jyothilekshmi Shylesh,

     Gopika Bhavan,

     Elanthoor,

     Pathanamthitta.

4.  Pavathy Shylesh,

        -do- do-

5. Karthika Shylesh,

       -do- do-

JUDGMENT

JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU  : PRESIDENT

The appellants are the opposite parties/New India Assurance Co. in CC.52/2007 in the file of CDRF, Pathanamthitta.  The appellants are under orders to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- the assured amount  with interest at 8% per annum from the date of complaint and also Rs.5000/- as compensation and Rs.2500/- as cost to the legal heirs of the deceased.

2. The assured in the instant case, whose legal heirs have filed the complaint was covered under the Pravasi Bharathiya Bima  Yojana Policy of the appellant.  He was employed abroad.  When he come  on leave he met with an accident and died.  The opposite parties repudiated the claim contending that the policy coverage is only with respect to the accident or death that take place when he was staying abroad.

3. The evidence adduced consisted of the testimony of PW1, DW1; Exts.A1 to A7 and  B1.

4. The facts are not in dispute.  The counsel for the  appellant is relying on the policy condition No.3 Section 1 which is as follows: “if at any time during currency of this policy, as stated in the schedule  hereto, and whilst stay abroad, the insured person shall sustain any bodily injury etc…” implied that the policy coverage is limited  the accident etc. sustained by the assured when he was staying abroad.  There is no other clause in the conditions of the policy that specifically mentions that the policy coverage is limited to the situation that the accident should take place in the foreign soil.  We find there is ambiguity in the clause.  Hence  interpretation should be  in favour of the complainant.  We find there is no scope for admitting the appeal.

5. Appeal dismissed in limine.

Office is directed to forward the copy of this order to the Forum.

          JUSTICE SRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU            : PRESIDENT

          SRI.M.K.ABDULLA SONA                        : MEMBER

ps