National Consumer Disputes Redressal
R.T. Latha @ J. Suvarnalatha vs Life Insurance Corporation Of India on 18 December, 2007
Equivalent citations: I(2008)CPJ253(NC)
ORDER
K.S. Gupta, J. (Presiding Member)
1. In this revision, challenge is to the order dated 29.9.2006 of Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission" Bangalore, modifying the order of a District Forum dated 18.5.2006 in appeal and directing the respondent-Insurance Company to pay the sum assured along with other benefits under the policies bearing Nos. 662149605, 662149789 and 361336424 with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of complaint, to the petitioner. The District Forum had directed the respondent to pay the insurance amount with accident benefits together with interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date of filing of complaint.
Controversy in this revision centres around the entitlement of petitioner/complainant to the accident benefits under the three polices. It is not in dispute that the husband of the petitioner had purchased the three policies on 28.3.2003, 28.8.2003 and 28.10.2003 and he died on 23.12.2003. Claim was repudiated by the respondent/opposite party-Insurance Company on the ground of life assured having committed suicide within one year from the date of issuance of policies. In its order modifying the Forum's order the State Commission has taken note of one of the terms of policies as also autopsy report of the deceased. Relevant term of the policies which is common as noticed in the State Commission's order reads thus:
To pay additional sum and equal to the sum assured under this Policy of the Life Assured shall sustain any bodily injury resulting solely and directly from the accident caused by outwards, violent and visible means and such injury shall within 180 days of its occurrence solely directly and independently of all other causes resulting in the death of the Life Assured. However, such additional sum payable in respect of this Policy together with any such additional sums payable under other Policies of the Life Assured shall not exceed Rs. 25,000.
2. Cause of death, as provisionally opined in the autopsy report dated 24.12.2003 was, 'Death was due to cardio-respiratory failure secondary to food poisoning'. After receipt of the report of FSL, final report given was Cause of death was due to 'consumption of organo phosphoric compound'. Submission advanced by Mr. Shyamsunder for the petitioner is that the cause of death of life assured is attributable to accident as is manifest from the autopsy report(s). Taking note of the term of policies reproduced above autopsy report(s) and absence of any bodily injury, I am in agreement with the view taken by the State Commission that it is not a case of death by accident. There is, thus, no illegality or jurisdictional error in the order of State Commission calling for interference in revisional jurisdiction under Section 21(b) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Revision is, therefore, dismissed.