Haryana

StateCommission

A/608/2015

ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. - Complainant(s)

Versus

SATVIR - Opp.Party(s)

D.C.KUMAR

20 Nov 2015

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                           

                                                                    First Appeal No  :   608 of 2015

Date of Institution:  17.07.2015

                                                                   Date of Decision:    20.11.2015

 

1.      The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Branch Office, Railway Road, Kurukshetra.

2.      The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Head Office, P.B. No.7037, A25/27, Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi.

          Both through Sh. S.P. Singh, Regional Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Regional Office, LIC Building, IInd Floor, Jagadhari Road, Ambala Cantt.

                             Appellant-Opposite Party

 

Versus

 

1.      Satvir (minor) aged 17 years,

2.      Sanjay (minor) aged 12 years,

3.      Sonu (minor) aged 6 years all sons,

4.      Sapna (daughter),

5.      Krishna Devi wife of Sh. Ram Kumar son of Shri Bhagwan Dass.

 

          All residents of Village Hansi, District Hisar (minors through their mother complainant No.5 as their natural guardian and next friend).

Respondents-Complainants

 

 

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

                             Mr. B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                             Mr. Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member

 

Present:              Mr. D.C. Kumar, Advocate for the appellants.

                             Mr. B.S. Dhillon, Advocate for the respondents.

 

                                                   O R D E R

 

NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL)

 

          The Oriental Insurance Company Limited -opposite party (for short ‘Insurance Company’) has filed the instant appeal against the order dated May 07^th, 2015 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kurukshetra (for short, ‘District Forum’) whereby complaint filed by the complainants was allowed. The Insurance Company was directed to pay sum insured, that is, Rs.4,00,000/- alongwith interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint till its realization to the complainants. 

2.      Ram Kumar (since deceased)- life assured, father of complainants No.1 to 4 and husband of complainant No.5 purchased Nagrik Suraksha Policy for the period May 11^th, 2011 to May 10^th, 2012 from the Insurance Company.  The sum insured was Rs.3,20,000/- under Personal Accident and Rs.80,000/- Hospitalization, that is, Rs.4,00,000/-.  On October 11^th, 2011 life assured met with an accident and died on October 17^th, 2011.   The claim submitted by the complainants was not settled by the Insurance Company.  Hence, the complaint.

3.      Learned counsel for the Insurance Company has urged that in the Claim Form (Exhibit A-9) Smt. Krishna-complainant No.5 herself claimed Rs.3,20,000/- under Personal Accident.  So, awarding of Rs.80,000/- by the District Forum for the hospitalization was not justified. 

4.      Learned counsel for the complainants has fairly admitted this fact. 

5.      In this view of the matter, the appeal is accepted and the impugned order is modified to the extent that the Insurance Company shall pay only Rs.3,20,000/- towards Personal Accident, to the complainants alongwith interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint, that is, September 14^th, 2012 till its actual payment.

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

 

Announced 20.11.2015

(Diwan Singh Chauhan) Member

(B.M. Bedi) Judicial Member

(Nawab Singh) President

U.K