NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/1734/2007

LIC OF INDIA - Complainant(s)

Versus

SMT. KUSMA DEVI - Opp.Party(s)

MR. UTTAM CHAND MITTAL, ADV.

21 Apr 2011

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
REVISION PETITION NO. 1734 OF 2007
 
(Against the Order dated 12/01/2006 in Appeal No. 133/2006 of the State Commission Punjab)
1. LIC OF INDIA
THROUGH ASSISTANT SECRETARY, JEEVAN BHARTI BUILDING CONNAUGHT PLACE
NEW DELHI - 110 001
DELHI
...........Petitioner(s)
Versus 
1. SMT. KUSMA DEVI
W/O. LATE SH, DHARAM PAL R/O. NEAR BABA,FARID PUBLIC SECHOOL, GALI NO.1, KOT KAPURA ROAD
FARIDKOT
PUNJAB
...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHAN, PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. VINEETA RAI, MEMBER

For the Petitioner :MR. UTTAM CHAND MITTAL, ADV.
For the Respondent :MR. VIPIN, ADV.

Dated : 21 Apr 2011
ORDER

Life Insurance Corpn. of India, the petitioner herein, was the opposite party before the District Forum.

 

            Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the complainant/respondent’s husband obtained a Jeevan Mitra (Double Cover) Endowment Policy from the petitioner for a sum of Rs.50,000/- on 21.12.2002.  Assured died on 1.4.2004 in a hospital at Ludiana.   Respondent preferred claim with the petitioner insurance company which was repudiated on the ground that the assured had suppressed material facts regarding his health at the time of obtaining the policy.  That he did not disclose that he was suffering from heart problem/chest pain for a long time and was taking treatment from DMC/AIIMS.  Aggrieved by this respondent filed a complaint before the District Forum.

 

District Forum allowed the complaint and directed the petitioner to pay the entire benefits of Jeewan Mitra (double cover) endowment policy to the complainant with Rs. 10,000/- as compensation and Rs.2,500/- as costs.

 

Petitioner being aggrieved filed the appeal before the State Commission, which has been dismissed by the impugned order.

 

While issuing Notice, this Commission had stayed the operation of the order impugned subject to payment of Rs.5,000/- to the respondent towards litigation expenses.  Counsel for the respondent states that the respondent has already received the amount awarded by the District Forum.

Since the decree awarded by the District Forum has already been executed, Revision Petition has become infructuous and is dismissed as such.

 

 
......................J
ASHOK BHAN
PRESIDENT
......................
VINEETA RAI
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.