NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Vs. PRASANTH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Opposite party in O. P. No.68/2001 on the file of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Alappuzha is the appellant.

(2.) Complainant's case before the District Forum was that his father obtained Karshaka Raksha Insurance Policy from the opposite party for the period from 2.10.2000 to 1.10.2001. He died on 10.11.2000 by drowning, complainant was the nominee. Though claim was made, that was repudiated. He alleged deficiency and, therefore, wanted direction.

(3.) In the version by the opposite party they contended that the insured fell into the Thodu due to epilepsy and he died. The said peril is excluded in the policy. Therefore, the repudiation is valid. They wanted dismissal of the complaint. The complainant gave evidence as P. W.1. P. W.2 is the person who gave Exbt. B3 first information and P. W.3 conducted the post mortem and issued Exbt. B3 post mortem report. The opposite party produced Exbts. B1 and B6. On a consideration of the said material District Forum made the impugned direction to the opposite party to pay the insured amount with interest. It is the said direction that is under challenge in this appeal.