RAMA DEVI AGARWAL Vs. LIC OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed by the complainant appellant against order dated 21.2.2008 passed by the District Forum, Jaipur -II in contempt petition No. 191/07 by which the application was rejected inter alia holding that compliance of the judgment in question has been made by the respondents LIC.

(2.) IT arises in the following circumstances - That the complainant appellant had filed a complaint before the District Forum, Jaipur -II bearing No. 602/2001 inter alia stating that her son Lalit Kumar Agarwal, now deceased had taken an insurance policy known as Jeevan Mitra Double Cover Endowment Plan with accidental benefits for a sum of Rs. 1 lac on 14.11.1991 and the deceased had died on 26.7.1997 and thereafter claim was preferred by the complainant appellant before the respondents LIC but the claim was repudiated by the LIC and after hearing the parties, that complaint was dismissed by the District Forum through order dated 15.9.2005. Aggrieved from that order the complainant appellant had filed an appeal before this Commission and this appeal was registered as appeal No. 1882/2005 and this appeal was allowed by the State Commission through judgment dated 27.9.2007 in the following manner: "For the reasons stated above, this appeal filed by the complainant appellant deserves to be allowed and the same is accordingly allowed and the impugned order dated 15.9.2005 passed by the District Forum, Jaipur -II is quashed and set aside and the complaint filed by the complainant appellant is allowed in the manner that the respondents LIC would pay a sum of Rs. 1 lac to the complainant appellant along with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint till the payment is made." Since after passing of the appellate judgment the respondents LIC had made full compliance of the appellate judgment dated 27.9.2007 but the complainant was not satisfied with that and had filed an application under Section 27 of the C.P. Act, 1986 bearing No. 191/07 inter alia stating that as per terms of the policy the respondents LIC was also bound to make payment of bonus and since the appellate judgment was silent on that point, therefore, it was prayed that the order be passed against the LIC for making payment of bonus. The District Forum, Jaipur -II through impugned order dated 21.2.2008 had dismissed the application inter alia holding that the respondents had made full compliance of the appellate judgment. Aggrieved from that order dated 21.2.2008 passed by the District Forum, Jaipur -II, this appeal has been filed by the appellant.

(3.) IN this appeal the main contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that since bonus was also to be paid by the respondents LIC to the complainant and since by mistake it was not mentioned in the appellate judgment, therefore, even then the respondents LIC was bound to make the payment of bonus. Hence appellate judgment be corrected in that manner or the LIC be directed to make payment of bonus to the complainant appellant