LIC OF INDIA Vs. K NARSIMULU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition has been filed by the Life Insurance Corporation of India and another (hereinafter referred to as the 'Petitioner') against the order of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Andhra Pradesh (hereinafter referred to as the 'State Commission') in favour of one K. Narsimulu (hereinafter referred to as the 'Respondent') who was the original complainant before the District Forum.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the Respondent was working as a Crane Operator in Nagarjuna Steel Ltd. from 1982 onwards. He took two insurance policies under the Jeevan Mitra Double Cover Endowment Plan for Rs. 50,000 and Rs. 1,00,000 commencing from 1.7.1996 and 28.9.1996 for which he regularly paid the premium amount. On 28.4.1997 while Respondent was working on the Crane he met with an accident resulting in serious injuries including to his spinal cord because of which he suffered decreased sensation and his movements became restricted and impaired. Despite two operations the Respondent's ability to work and earn could not be restored and being fully disabled he was forced to take voluntary retirement.

(3.) Since, as per Section 10-A of the said insurance policy there was a disability clause which stipulated that in case of disability to the life assured, the Petitioner would pay in monthly instalments spread over 10 years an additional sum equal to the sum assured and if the policy becomes claim before the expiry of the said period of 10 years, the disability benefit instalments which have not fallen due will be paid along with the claim, the Respondent filed a claim with the Petitioner's Branch Manager on 25.1.2001 seeking the benefit stipulated under the permanent disability clause. He also filed the relevant papers certifying that he had been permanently disabled and that he was no longer fit to work. Despite this, the Petitioner rejected the claim on the grounds that Respondent was not permanently disabled since according to the medical certificates his disability in one place was mentioned as 55% and in another as 65%.