State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The Branch Manager, L.I.C.I. & Anr. vs Smt. Uma Kar. on 28 November, 2011
Daily Order
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION WEST BENGAL BHABANI BHAWAN (Gr. Floor), 31, Belvedere Road, Kolkata - 700027 FA No: 437 Of 2010 (Arisen out of Order Dated 30/06/2010 in Case No. 34/2010 of District Paschim Midnapore) 1. The Branch Manager, L.I.C.I. Kharagpur Branch, Kusum Apartment(North End)O.T. Road, P.O.& P.S. Kharagpur, Dist. Paschim Medinipur, West Bengal. 2. The Zonal Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India Hindusthan Building, 4, C.R. Avenue, Kolkata - 700 072. ...........Appellant(s) Versus 1. Smt. Uma Kar. W/o Late Akshay Kar, Barabazar, P.O. & P.S. Midnapur, Dist. Paschim Medinipur, West Bengal. ...........Respondent(s) BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRABIR KUMAR SAMANTA PRESIDENT HON'BLE MRS. SILPI MAJUMDER Member HON'BLE MR. SHANKAR COARI Member For the Appellant: S. Roy Chowdhury.Mr. T.Mohanty, Advocate For the Respondent: ORDER
No. 8/28.11.2011.
HON'BLE JUSTICE SRI PRABIR KUMAR SAMANTA, PRESIDENT.
Appellant is present through Ld. Advocate. The Respondent is the wife of the insured who took the double accident benefit policy from the L.I.C.I. covering the assured sum of Rs.50,000/-. The insured died in a railway accident on 15.02.2007. On his death the Respondent claimed the assured sum under the Policy for the accidental death of her husband and it is not in dispute that she has received a sum of Rs.97,821/- from the insurer in settlement of her claim. The Complainant - Respondent has filed the aforesaid claim case alleging that double accident benefit covering the accidental risk for the assured sum of Rs.50,000/- has not been paid by the insured to the Complainant. Hence the complaint case.
The Appellant - Insurer has taken a specific plea by filing Written Objection before the Forum below to the effect that the aforesaid Insurance Policy was assigned by the Complainant to his Banker namely the Bank of India. In the said complaint case the Appellant - Insurer has further produced the documents showing that the double benefit covering the accidental risk for the assured sum of Rs.50,000/- has also been paid to the assignee of the insured namely the Bank of India. The said receipt is on record along with the receipt showing that the Bank of India has also received the aforesaid sum of Rs.97,821/- under the Policy as an assignee of the insured which fact the Complainant - Respondent has not denied. Having regard to the aforesaid two receipts showing both the payments as above, for Rs.97,821/- by way of settlement of the claim on the death of the insured and the sum of Rs.50,000/- as the double benefit covering the accident we are of the view that the Forum below has acted perversely by allowing the complaint so far as the double benefit as above for the sum of Rs.50,000/- only is concerned.
In spite of notice of the above appeal to the Complainant Respondent no one appears to contest the appeal. Hence, the impugned judgement and order is set aside. The appeal is thus allowed. There will be no order as to cost.
LCR be sent down to the Forum below along with a copy of this order forthwith. [HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRABIR KUMAR SAMANTA] PRESIDENT [HON'BLE MRS. SILPI MAJUMDER] Member [HON'BLE MR. SHANKAR COARI] Member