KARANAM SIRISHA Vs. INSURANCE REGULATORY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The husband of the petitioner, before and after marriage, had taken six life insurance policies from respondents 1, 5 and 6. The details of these policies are as follows:

(2.) The 7 respondent, who is the father of the deceased husband of the petitioner, was registered as nominee in respect of the life insurance policies shown in Sl. Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 6. The 8 respondent, who is the mother of the deceased husband of the petitioner, was nominated in the other policies. The husband of the petitioner was murdered on 18/8/2021 in Vijayawada and investigation in the said murder is being carried out in Crime No. 555 of 2021.

(3.) The petitioner has approached this Court with the complaint that respondents 7 and 8 are seeking to take away the sum assured being paid out by the insurance companies, without giving her share of the said compensation. The petitioner contends that she is entitled to a share of the sum assured, under the said life insurance policies, as she is a Class-I heir of her late husband along with respondents 7 and 8 and would be entitled for her share in the sum assured being paid out by the insurance companies. She also contends that her husband had executed a Will bequeathing the sum assured in these policies to her and she is the sole person who is entitled to the entire sum assured.