KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. APPEAL No. 78/2010 JUDGMENT DATED:20-07-2010 PRESENT: JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU :PRESIDENT SHRI.S. CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR : MEMBER Joy.D.Silva, S/o Karlukutty, Chettivalappil House, : APPELLANT Kaloor Vadakkummury, P.O.Kadukutty. (By Adv:Sri.Manumon.A & Unnikrishnan) Vs. The United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Branch Office, Sreekumar Building, South Junction, Chalakudy, : RESPONDENT Rep. by Branch Manager. JUDGMENT JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU:PRESIDENT The appellant is the complainant in CC.35/09 in the file of CDRF, Thrissur in the complaint filed claiming the assured sum for the loss of one eye. The Forum has directed the opposite party/Insurance company to pay a sum of Rs.42,000/- to the complainant. 2. The case of the complainant is that he was a worker in Kerala Chemicals and Proteins Limited, Kathikudam. He was covered with the personal accident insurance policy issued by the opposite party. During the policy period he met with an accident and the same resulted in loss vision to his right eye. For the loss of vision of one eye he is entitled to 50% of the capital sum assured ie Rs.2.lakhs. He has sought for 50% of the insured sum which would work out to Rs.1.lakh. 3. The opposite parties were set exparte before the Forum. The evidence adduced consisted of the proof affidavit of the complainant and Exts.P1 to P8. 4. There was no representation for the respondent/Insurance company before this Commission also. 5. We find that the Forum has ordered to pay only Rs.42,000/- as allowed by the opposite parties also, on the basis of the disability certificate issued by the Medical Board. As per the above Ext.P5 certificate the permanent disability is assessed at 30%. It is also mentioned therein that the complainant is having optic atrophy of right eye. As per Ext.P2 policy clause I(c) for the loss of sight of one eye, the complainant is entitled for 50% of the capital sum assured. Ext.P2 is the policy which would show that the capital sum assured is Rs.2.lakhs. It is a master policy. The complainant has also produced Ext.P1 certificate issued by a Senior Consultant/Eye Micro Surgeon wherein it is mentioned that the complainant has no vision to the right eye. The permanent visual disability mentioned in Ext.P1 is 40%. 6. As pointed out by the counsel for the appellant what has been assessed in Ext.P1 and P5 certificates are the percentage of permanent disability taking the body as a whole and what has been mentioned in Ext.P2 policy is loss of vision of one eye for which 50% of the capital sum insured is eligible. It can be found from Ext.P1 and P5 certificates that the complainant has lost vision to his right eye or that he has no vision to the right eye. The above aspect was not considered by the Forum. As he has lost vision to one eye as per Ext.P2 policy the complainant is entitled for 50% of the assured sum which would work out to Rs.1.lakh. In the circumstances the opposite parties/respondents are directed to pay Rs.1.lakh to the complainant with interest at 9% from the date of complaint and also cost of Rs.2000/-. The amounts are to be paid within 3 months from the date of receipt of this order failing which the complainant would be entitled interest at 15% per annum from today. In the result the appeal is allowed. The office will forward a copy of this order to the Forum. JUSTICE K.R. UDAYABHANU:PRESIDENT S. CHANDRAMOHAN NAIR : MEMBER VL. | 
