Haryana

StateCommission

A/527/2016

LIFE INSURANCE CORP.OF INDIA - Complainant(s)

Versus

SAROJ - Opp.Party(s)

SATYAWAN AHLAWAT

15 Feb 2017

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

 

                                                                    First Appeal No  :   527 of 2016

Date of Institution:  09.06.2016

                                                                   Date of Decision:    15.02.2017

 

 

 

 

 

Life Insurance Corporation of India, situated at near Old Tehsil Road, Jhajjar through its Manager (Legal), Division Office, Chandigarh.

 

                             Appellant-Opposite Party

 

 

 

Versus

 

 

 

Saroj widow of Sunder and daughter of Raj Singh, resident of Rohrai, Tehsil Kosli, District Rewari, at present resident of Mohanbari, Tehsil Matanhail, District Jhajjar.

Respondent-Complainant

 

 

 

 

 

CORAM:             Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                             Mr. Balbir Singh, Judicial Member.

                             Mr. Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member

 

 

 

 

 

Argued by:          Mr. Satyawan Ahlawat, Advocate for the appellant.

                             Mr. Deepender Ahlawat, Advocate for the respondent-complainant.

 

 

 

 

                                                   O R D E R

 

NAWAB SINGH J. (ORAL)

 

          Sunder, deceased purchased two life insurance policies bearing No.140164876 and 140164921. The date of commencement of risk of the policy No.140164876 was January 15^th, 2013 and the sum assured was Rs.4 lakh. The date of commencement of risk of the policy No.140164921 was March 30^th, 2013 and the sum assured was Rs.2 lakh.  He was a Constable in 182 BN, CRPF, Pulwama, Jammu and Kashmir.  He died on August 13^th, 2013 at about 15.45 due to accidental fire.  His widow Saroj, being nominee filed claim with the Life Insurance Corporation of India-opposite party (for short, ‘LIC’) but the same was repudiated on the ground that Sunder committed suicide and as such, the risk was not covered under the policies.  She filed complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Jhajjar (for short, ‘District Forum’).

2.      The District Forum allowed the complaint vide order dated April 21^st, 2016.  For ready reference, operative part of the order is reproduced as under:-

          “5.     In view of the aforesaid discussion and findings, it is observed that there is deficiency in service on the part of the respondent, who did not make the payment of genuine claim of the complainant.  Therefore, it is directed that the respondent shall make the payment of a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- as sum assured of policy No.140164876 and sum assured of Rs.2,00,000/- of policy No.140164921 alongwith an interest @ 9% per annum from the date of death of Sunder i.e. 13.8.2013 till realization of final payment to the complainant.  The complainant is also entitled for a sum of Rs.5500/- on account of litigation expenses for the present unwanted and unwarranted litigation only due to the deficiency in service on the part of the respondent.  The complaint stands disposed of accordingly.”

3.      Against the aforesaid order, LIC has filed the instant appeal. 

4.      Learned counsel for the LIC has urged that since Sunder committed suicide, so, as per clause 6 of the policy, the LIC was not liable to indemnify the life assured.  In support the contention, reliance has been placed upon a letter dated August 13^th, 2013 written by Santosh Kumar Singh, Assistant Commandant Officer, Commanding-F/182, CRPF to the Station House Officer, Police Station Pulwama, Jammu & Kashmir to lodge FIR. 

5.      In the aforesaid letter, it was mentioned that Sunder shot himself by INSAS weapon on August 13^th, 2013 at 1545 hours.  He was brought to District Hospital, Pulwama, from where he was referred to SMHS, Srinagar where he was declared dead at about 1730 hours.  On the basis of the letter written by the Commanding Officer, DDR was registered in Police Station Pulwama. Postmortem Report is Exhibit P-10.  Detailed Inquiry Report of the SHO, Police Station Pulwama and Death Certificate are Exhibits P-8 & P9 respectively.  In the DDR, it was mentioned that Sunder died due to accidental fire.  In the Detailed Report prepared by SHO, Police Station Pulwama, it was stated that death was found to be suspicious.  In the Death Certificate (Exhibit P-9) issued by Pulwama Municipal Committee, Government of Jammu & Kashmir, it was mentioned that Sunder received accidental fire at Camp Pulwama.  In view of this overwhelming evidence, it cannot be said from any angle that Sunder committed suicide.  So far as letter written by Commanding Officer to the SHO is concerned, he was not an eye witness.  The letter could have been sent on the basis of hearsay evidence.  In this view of the matter, on the basis of the letter written by Commanding Officer, it is not possible to hold that Sunder committed suicide particularly the evidence consisting of documents viz. Detailed Inquiry Report of the SHO, Police Station Pulwama (Exhibits P-8), Death Certificate (Exhibit P-9), Postmortem Report (Exhibit P-10) wherein it clearly mentioned that Sunder died due to accidental fire.  Thus, the LIC was liable to pay the benefits of insurance to the complainant.  The order under challenge requires no interference.  The appeal is dismissed.  

6.      The statutory amount of Rs.25000/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the respondent-complainant against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules, after the expiry of period of appeal/revision, if any.

 

Announced 15.02.017

(Diwan Singh Chauhan) Member

(Balbir Singh) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President

UK