_{BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM:KURNOOL}

_{Present: Sri K.V.H.Prasad, B.A., LL.B., President}

_and

_{Smt C.Preethi, M.A., LL.B., Member}

_{Friday the 13th day of July, 2007}

_{CC.NO.23/2007}

_{M. Munivarnisa, W/o Late M.N. Abdul Razak,}

_{H.No. 18-76, Kothapeta Street, Atmakur, Kurnool District.}                                

                                                _{... COMPLAINANT}

_Verses

_{1)             The Divisional Manager, Death Claims Department,}

                _{Divisional Office, LIC of India, Kadapa.}

_{2)             The Branch Manager, LIC of India, Atmakur Branch,} 

  _{Atmakur,  Kurnool District.}                

                _{... OPPOSITE PARTIES}

                _{This complaint coming on this day for orders in the presence of                Sri. M. Azmatualla, Advocate, Kurnool for Complainant,                                       Sri. I. Anantha Rama Sastry, Advocate, Kurnool for Opposite Party No. 1 and No.2 and stood over for consideration till this day, the Forum made the following:-}

_ORDER

_{(As per Sri. K.V.H. Prasad, President)}

1. _{This case of the complainant is filed under section 2(1) (g) and 12 of C.P Act  seeking  Rs.4,00,000/- towards the assured amount of two policies Rs.50,000/- as compensation for mental agony at the deficiency of service and costs of the case, alleging non settlement of the claim  preferred by the complainant  the accident benefit  policy No.s 653691852 and 654132642 as nominee of policy holder consequent to demise of policy holder on 22.6.2006, due to accidental burn injuries, inspite of submission of all required documentary record and causing of legal notice dated 11.1.2007.}

1. _{In pursuance of the receipt of notice of this forum as to this case of the complainant, the opposite parties caused their appearance and contested the case by filling their written version alleging the accident benefits claim of the complainant was not entertained for want of  dying declaration  and Mandal Executive Magistrates orders and hence the claim of the complainant was entertained on basic assured sum of Rs.1,00,000 under each policy along with entitled bonus and it was paid to the complainant vide cheque No.s 209373 and 209374 of 24.2.2007, for Rs.1,02,513 and Rs.1,00,022 respectively, and the claim of the accident benefit could be entertained on submission of the dying declaration of deceased policy holder and the orders of Mandal Executive Magistrate  and  so seeks dismissal of the complainants case with costs.}

1. _{In substantiation of the contentions while the complainant side has relied upon  documentary record in Ex.A.1 to A.9  and the sworn affidavit of the complainant and replies to the interrogatories exchanged, the opposite parties side has merely taken reliance on the sworn affidavit of the opposite party No.2 and on the replies to the interrogatories exchanged .}

1. _{Hence the point for consideration is whether any deficiency of the opposite parties is made out by the complainant for holding  their liability to the complainants claim .}

1. _{The sworn affidavit of the complainant filled on dated 15.5.2007 admits the receipt of payments worth Rs.2,02,535/- alleged by the opposite parties in their written version. Hence the consideration is limited to assessment of complainant’s entitleness for residuary amount of claim .}

_{6              While the Ex.A.1 envisages the receipt of two policy bonds bearing No.s 653691852 and 654132642  along with copy of F.I.R. and death certificate by the opposite party No. 2 , the Ex A.2. - office copy of complainants letter dated 19.9.2006 indicates submission  by the complainant all required documents sought by the opposite party i.e., attested Xerox copies of  F.I.R, Inquest, statement of complainant , post mortem report, death certificate and legal heir certificate along with duly filled claim form ,  the Ex A.4 to A.6. – attested Xerox of F.I.R , Inquest and post mortem report in Cr. No. 89/06 of P.S. Atmakur envisages the demise of M. Abdul Razack  - husband of the complainant and holder of policies concerned in this case – due to accidental burn injuries occurred on account of mosquito curtain catching fire on jump of a cat on kerosene lamp . While Ex.A.7- report of S.I. Police of Atmakur dated 17.9.2006  addressed to sub divisional police officer, Atmakur and Ex.A.8- proceedings of sub divisional police officer Atmakur dated 18.9.2006 on Ex.A.7 – holds the accidental demise of M.A. Razack due to burn injuries, the Ex.A.9 - of office copy of claim statement, medical attendants certificate, certificate of hospital treatment and disposal of deceased body – also mentions the demise of deceased due to accidental burns. In the absence of any material contra to the above material, there appears any material doubt the bonafidees of accidental demise of said policy holder due to burns, especially when the opposite party No.2  has taken them into account to believe the demise of  policy holder and  for making payment of  basic sums  assured with entitled bonus.} 

1. _{When any statement of the deceased was recorded and any order was passed by Executive Magistrate on said F.I.R., there appears any justification on the conduct of the opposite parties in insisting for dying declaration of the deceased policy holder and the order of the Executive Magistrate to believe the accidental death of the policy holder. When the Ex.A.7 and A.8.- indicates the closer of the case proceedings holding the demise of M.A. Razack (policy holder) due to accidental injuries there appears any justification in the conduct of the opposite parties for insisting to those documents which are not in existence, and in not acting upon that material in Ex.A.7 and A.8- which lends support to the accidental demise of policy holder envisaged in other documents , and in not satisfying in the mode of demise of policy holder and in not holding the  accidental demise of policy holder - for whom the complainant is nominee - and in not settling the claim accordingly for double accident benefit.}

1. _{Hence the complaint is allowed ordering the opposite parties 1 and 2 jointly and severally to pay the complainant Rs. 1,00,000 /-under each policy towards the accident benefits as basic assured sum of Rs.1,00,000/- under each policy was already paid to the complaint admittedly . The opposite parties  1 and 2 jointly and severally shall also pay to the complainant Rs.10,000/- as compensation for mental agony the complainant has suffered at improper settlement of claim and Rs.5,000/- as costs of this case as the opposite parties by their non settlement of  claim  by insisting for those documents which are not possible for production and not acting upon the other cogent material record establishing the demise of policy holder due to accidental burns , and constrained the complainant to the forum  for redressal of her grievances .Time for compliance , by the opposite parties , of the supra stated award is one month from the receipt of this order . In default the opposite parties shall be jointly and severally liable to pay the supra stated award amount with 9 % interest per annum from the date of default will realization.}

                _{Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced in the Open bench this the 13th day of July, 2007.}

              _{Sd/-                                                                              Sd/-}

                _{MEMBER                                                                                                                 PRESIDENT}            

_{APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE}

_{Witnesses Examined}

_{For the complainant :Nil                     For the opposite parties :Nil}

_{List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-}

_{Ex.A1                      Receipt issued by opposite party as to receipt of original policy Bonds along with copies of FIR and Death Certificate.}

_{Ex.A2                      Office copy by letter, dated 19.9.2006 of complainant addressed to opposite party for submission by certain documents.}

_{Ex.A3                      Office copy of legal notice, dated 11.01.2007 along with postal  Receipts and acknowledgement.}

_{Ex.A4                      Attested Xerox of FIR No.89/06 , dated 23.6.2006 (No.in 2 papers)}

_{Ex.A5                      Attested xerox copy of Inquest Report (No.in 2 papers)}

_{Ex.A6                      Attested xerox of Post Morton report (No.in 3 papers)}

_{­
Ex.A7                      Attested xerox copy of proceedings Sub-Inspector of Police,}

_{Atmakur. Police station addressed to Sub Divisional Police Officer,    (Deputy Superintendent of Police) Atmakur.}

_{Ex.A8                      Attested xerox copy of proceedings of Deputy Superintendent of police.}

_{Ex.A9                      Office copy of claimant’s statement (Claim Form ‘A’)  (No in 4 papers)}

_{List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties : Nil}

                      _{Sd/-  Sd/-}

                _{MEMBER                                                                                                                 PRESIDENT}            

_{Copy to:-}

_{1. Sri. M. Azmathulla, Advocate, Kurnool.}

_{2. Sri. I. Anantha Rama Sastry, Advocate, Kurnool.}

_{Copy was made ready on:}

_{Copy was dispatched on:}

_{Copy was delivered to parties:}