NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. MOHINI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 2.5.2005 passed by District Forum, Yamuna Nagar in Complaint Case No. 240 dated 16.5.2003, whereby while accepting the complaint of the respondent -complainant, direction has been given to the appellant to pay Rs. 10,00,000 along with 12% interest from the date after three months of death and also to pay Rs. 50,000 as compensation on account of mental agony and harassment as well as cost of proceedings. The compliance of this order was to be done within 30 days from the date of the order.

(2.) PUT shortly, the facts as can be gathered from the record briefly stated are that Kali Ram, husband of Mohini Devi complainant employed with State Bank of India, was insured under Group Janta Personal Accident Insurance Policy bearing No. 420301/47/61/98/4389 issued in the name of State Bank of India Staff Association, Chandigarh Circle for a sum of Rs. 10,00,000 for the period 31.3.1999 to 30.3.2011. The said policy provided that if at any time during the currency of the policy the insured suffered any bodily injury resulting solely and directly from accident and is the direct cause of death of the insured, the insured sum will be payable by the company to the nominee under the policy. On 4.12.2002 at about 6.30 p.m. the insured -Kali Ram fell from staircase of his house and suffered accidental injuries. He was admitted in Gaba Hospital located at Yamuna Nagar on 5.12.2002. He died there at 4.00 a.m. on 7.12.2002. The complainant informed the opposite party Nos. 1 to 3 about the death of her husband and claimed the insured sum as per her letter dated 19.12.2002. The necessary documents which were asked from the complainant were supplied by her to the opposite parties. She also informed them that no post mortem had been conducted and no report was lodged with the police so that these documents could not be supplied to them. Finding no response from them, a registered letter dated 3.3.2003 was also sent to the opposite parties to settle the claim of her husband at an early date. In response, the opposite parties as per letter dated 11.4.2003 repudiated the claim. Forced by these circumstances, the complainant filed the present complaint.

(3.) UPON notice, the opposite parties put in their appearance. They pleaded in the written statement filed that the complainant has not produced any FIR or DDR report so as to prove that Kali Ram had suffered injuries in the accident and on that account had met with an accidental death. Further, according to the Medical Officer, who has treated the deceased, had not stated that Kali Ram died due to accidental injury. They further raised the plea of want of jurisdiction of the District Forum at Yamuna Nagar to try the claim because the policy was issued at Hisar while it was taken by State Bank of India Association at Chandigarh and that the claim is bad for mis -joinder of necessary parties as the policy holder State Bank of India Association has not been impleaded as part to the complaint.