CEHAT Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed u/s 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the impugned order dated 23.12.2010, passed by the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (hereinafter referred to as 'the State Commission') in FA No. 1029/2008, "Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) and Ors. v. Smt. Krishna Devi and Ors.", vide which, the order passed by the District Forum, K.G. Marg, New Delhi, dated 07.10.2008, allowing the consumer complaint, filed by the present respondent, was ordered to be modified.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the complainant No. 1/respondent No. 1 Smt. Krishna Devi is the widow and the other two complainants/respondents are the daughters of the deceased Rajbir Singh, who obtained life insurance policies from the LIC during his life time as per the details given below:-

(3.) It is stated that Rajbir Singh was working as a store keeper at some Army establishment at Delhi Cantt. and was getting a monthly salary of Rs. 7,000/- only. The deceased policy holder had a family, consisting of his wife Krishna Devi and two daughters namely, Minakshi and Chhavi and a son Amit Kumar. The complaint has been filed by his wife and two daughters. It has been stated in the consumer complaint that on 13.11.2003, Rajbir Singh while travelling from Delhi to Barot, District Bagpat (U.P.) where his family was living, was abducted by a group of four miscreants who took him to a forest at Gurana, tied him with rope and attempted to burn him alive by sprinkling kerosene oil on his body and igniting the same. The complainant suffered deep burn injuries and he was rushed to R.M.L. Hospital at Delhi, but he could not survive and succumbed to his injuries on 19.11.2003. The post mortem examination conducted on his body by the hospital authorities confirmed that he died of septicaemia due to burn injuries. The matter was reported by complainant No. 1 to the local police, who registered FIR u/s 302/364/34IPC after the intervention of Sr. Supdt. of Police Baghpat. It has been further mentioned in the complaint that after completing inquest report, the Police submitted charge sheet in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate against all four accused persons. The complainant also approached the LIC for obtaining claims under the Policy. However, the LIC settled claim under one policy only, i.e., Policy No. 121298563 for Rs. 50,000/- and paid a sum of Rs. 59,542/-. However, the LIC refused to pay the claim for the remaining policies on the ground that the deceased had not disclosed the factum of obtaining the first policy while filling the proposal form for obtaining the subsequent policies. Later on, the claim in respect of the policies No. 252813997 and 252815803 issued by the Meerut office was allowed, after an award was passed in favour of the complainants by the Ombudsman for UP and Uttaranchal State. For the remaining four policies obtained at Delhi also, the complainant approached the Ombudsman of Delhi, but the case was decided against them by the said Ombudsman. The present consumer complaint was filed seeking directions to the LIC to pay the insurance amount against the remaining policies plus bonus etc. The complainants demanded a total sum of Rs. 16 lakh along with interest @24% p.a. and also a sum of Rs. 2 lakh as accident benefit. A prayer was also made for payment of Rs. 1 lakh towards mental agony and Rs. 11,000/- for litigation cost.