ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LIMITED Vs. MADHUMITA SARKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 22.11.2006 in W.P. No. 10869 (W) of 2004 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court. The case of the writ petitioner/respondent in the writ petition was that her husband Late Chinmoy Sarkar, who was the holder of one Janata Personal Accident Insurance Policy, met with an accident on 24.06.2003 and he died on 25.06.2003. The Senior Branch Manager of Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Haldia Branch, Haldia, Medinipur was duly informed about such death of the writ petitioner's husband by a letter dated 30.06.2003 issued by the present writ petitioner/respondent and such letter was duly received by the Senior Branch Manager of the concerned Insurance Company. Such policy was for the period from 31.3.1998 to 31.3.2010 and the insured amount was Rs. 10 Lacs.

(2.) On 29.07.2003 the writ petitioner/respondent sent a letter to the Senior Branch Manager of the Insurance Company claiming the benefits of the policy of her husband as she was the nominee. It was the case of the writ petitioner/respondent that on 1.8.2003 a letter was issued by the Senior Branch Manager in the name of the Late husband of the writ petitioner/respondent intimating that such policy was cancelled with effect from 19.09.2002. It was further disclosed that such intimation of cancellation of the policy was given to the late husband of the writ petitioner/respondent earlier. It was the case of the writ petitioner in the writ petition that no such communication of cancellation of policy was ever made earlier either in the name of her late husband or in her name.

(3.) The learned Single Judge by the impugned judgment allowed the writ application and quashed the letter of refusal dated 18.11.2003 to pay the insured amount and directed such payment to be made within a period of four weeks together with interest @ 10% p.a. from the date of death of Chinmoy Sarkar, the late husband of the writ petitioner/respondent. Challenging such order the present appeal is preferred.