Kerala

StateCommission

A/15/422

BRANCH MANAGER LIC OF INDIA - Complainant(s)

Versus

VIMALA - Opp.Party(s)

G S KALKURA

12 Jul 2016

ORDER

 

 

KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL

COMMISSION  VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

APPEAL NO.422/15

JUDGMENT  DATED:12.07.2016

 

PRESENT : 

JUSTICE SHRI. P.Q. BARKATHALI                         :  PRESIDENT

SHRI.V.V. JOSE                                                          : MEMBER

1. LIC of India,

Divisional Office, Jeevan Prakash,

PB.No.1001, Pattom,

Thiruvananthapuram-695 004,                          

Repd. By its Divisional Manager.

: APPELLANTS

2. The Branch Manager,

LIC of India, Adoor Branch Office,

Adoor, Pathanamthitta Dist.

PIN – 691 523.

 

(By Adv: Sri. G.S. Kalkura)

 

Vs.

1. Vimala, Retd. Govt. Servant,

Uthivila Vadakkethil House,

Aickadu Muri, KodumonP.O,

Adoor Taluk, Pathanamthitta Dist.

                                                                                                : RESPONDENTS

2. Suchithra Babu,

D/o Vimala, Chaithram House,

Vallikode Muri & Village, Pathanamthitta.

 

(By Adv: Sri. Narayan R)

 

JUDGMENT

HON.JUSTICE.P.Q.BARKATHALI : PRESIDENT

 

This is an appeal filed by the opposite parties in CC.148/2014 on the file of Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Pathanamthitta  challenging the order of the Forum dated April 21, 2015 directing the opposite parties to pay an amount of Rs.1,30,000/-  with interest and a bonus of Rs.5460/- and with a cost of Rs.3000/- to the complainant.

 

2.      The case of the complainant as detailed in the complaint before the Forum in brief is this:-

First complainant is the mother and 2^nd complainant is the sister of deceased Subhash.  Subhash was murdered on May 04, 2010 and the Kodumon police has registered a case against the culprits as crime No.204/10.  Complainants are the only legal heirs of deceased Subhash.  Subhash was a holder of life Insurance Policy with the 2^nd opposite party for an amount of Rs.1,30,000/-.  The policy commenced in June 2009 and will be maturing on June 25, 2015.  Deceased paid 3 half yearly premiums till his death.  The premium amount was Rs.4220/-.  As per the terms and conditions of the policy opposite parties are liable to pay the sum assured + an equal amount + bonus.  But opposite parties paid only Rs.1,35,460/-.  Complainant filed the complaint claiming the balance amount with interest. 

 

3.      Opposite parties are LIC of India, represented by its Divisional Officer at Thiruvananthapuram and the Branch Manager of Adoor Branch Office.  They in their version contended thus before the Forum:-

The complainants are not entitled to double accident benefit which is applicable only in cases of death involving accident.  These opposite parties have already paid the assured amount of Rs.1,30,000/- together with a bonus of Rs.5,460/- to the complainants.  The accident involving the death of the Subhash comes under the exception contained in condition No.10(b)(i)(iv) of General Conditions of Life Insurance Policy.  The death of the assured happened as a result of breach of law on his part.  It is seen from the criminal case records that assured was engaged in criminal act of breach of law.  Therefore there is no deficiency of service on their part.  The complaint is barred by limitation.

 

4.      The first complainant filed the chief affidavit and Ext.A1 to A7 were marked on her side and on the side of the opposite parties Ext.B1 policy certificate was marked before the Forum.  On an appreciation of evidence Forum found that the death of the deceased has to be taken as accidental death and that therefore complainants are entitled to the double accident benefit.  Forum directed the opposite parties to pay Rs.1,30,000/- with interest and bonus of Rs.5460/- and a cost of Rs.3000/-.  Opposite parties have now come up in appeal challenging the said order of the Forum. 

 

5.      Heard both the counsels.

6.      The following points arise for consideration:-

1. Whether the complainants are entitled to double accident benefits?
2. Whether the impugned order of the Forum can be sustained?

 

7.    It is admitted that deceased was a policy holder of the opposite parties, Life Insurance Corporation.  Ext.B1 is the policy certificate.  It is also not in dispute that deceased was murdered on May 04, 2010 and Kodumon police has registered the case as Crime No.204/10.  Opposite parties have also released the claim assured amount of Rs.1,30,000/- together with a bonus    of    Rs.5260/-   to  the   complainants   who are  the legal  heirs  of

the deceased.  Therefore the only question to be decided is whether the complainants are entitled to double accident benefits.  The counsel for the appellant argued that it is seen from the records of the criminal case that accident occurred when the life assured was engaged in criminal act committing breach of law and hence the death of Subhash falls within the exception envisaged in condition 10 (b)(i)(iv) of General Conditions of Life Insurance Policy.  It is true that condition No. 10 (b)(i)(iv) provides that corporation is not liable to pay double death benefit if death results from the assured committing a breach of law.  But the question to be considered is whether the murder of the deceased can be considered as an accidental death.  High Court of Alahabad in 2014 ACJ 1237 has held that even willful murder of assured is accidental as far as insured is concerned.  In the light of the principles laid down in the above decision we hold that the murder of deceased has to be considered as an accidental death.  That being so, the complainants who are the only legal heir of the deceased are entitled to double accident benefit under policy Ext.B1.  The finding of the Forum on this point is confirmed.

8.      Forum directed the opposite parties to pay Rs.1,30,000/- to the complainant with interest and bonus of Rs.5460/- and a cost of Rs.3000/-.  We find no ground to interfere with the said finding of the Forum.

In the result appeal is dismissed with a cost of Rs.5000/-.

 

 

JUSTICE SHRI.P.Q. BARKATHALI :  PRESIDENT

 

 

V.V. JOSE : MEMBER

 

VL.