J MADHAVI Vs. LIC OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is by the complainant challenging the order dated 16.5.2008 passed by the DF, Bangalore IV addl. DF, Bangalore in Complaint No. 2217/2007 by dismissing her complaint.

(2.) THE facts in this case are as follows: One Thimmaiah had taken Jeevan Mitra Triple cover Endowment + Profit + Accident benefit Policy with effect from 13.4.2004 and has paid the first premium of Rs. 52,147. Thereafter the insured has assigned the said policy in favour of the complainant under assignment deed dated 18.10.2005. The same was registered in the office of the LIC also. The premium payable for the year 2005 according to the complainant has been paid by the Insured on 31.5.2005. But ultimately the insured died on 18.2.2006. After the death of the insured the complainant made a claim for payment of the assured sum on the basis of the assignment deed executed by the insured in favour of the complainant. The complainant also had produced several other documents along with a claim form for payment of the assured sum. According to the complainant even though the complainant has made a claim for payment from the OP, OP has neither considered nor repudiated the claim of the complainant and this has made the complainant to file the complaint before the DF.

(3.) THE LIC appearing for the Insurance Company submitted that the claim of the complainant has been repudiated on the ground that the premium has been paid by the LIC agent which is not a valid payment. In support of this the Insurance Company relied upon the decision in Harshad J. Shah and Another v. LIC of India and Others, 1997 3 CPJ 9 and also the decision of the National Commission in the case of Life Insurance Corpn. of India and Anr. v. Consumer Education and Research Society and Ors., 1994 1 CPJ 95. In the said decision the agent of the Insurance Company paid the premium after the lapse of the policy. Taking this fact into consideration that the premium paid to agent of the LIC who has not been authorized to collect the premium as per the regulations of LIC and as the premium was paid after the lapse of the policy in one case and another case after the death of the insured in the accident, it was held that the said payment is no payment in the above said decisions. In the instant case the premium has been paid well within the due date. Whether the premium has been paid either to LIC agent or by the insured himself, the same has been received by the LIC within the due date. It is not the case of the LIC within the due date. It is not the case of the LIC that the premim had not been received within the due date. Therefore, the said decision is of no assistance to the appellant.