MEHRUNNISA Vs. LIC OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order of the State Commission in original complaint no. 56/98 whereby the State Commission in principal dismissed the complaint filed by the appellant. However, taking note of the fact that Claims Review Committee of the Insurance Company had recommended ex gratia payment of Rs.2,50,000/ - to the appellant, directed the insurance company to pay ex gratia amount of Rs.2,50,000/ - to the complainant besides Rs.25000/ - as compensation for mental agony and Rs.5000/ - for litigation cost.

(2.) BRIEFLY put the facts relevant for the disposal of the revision petition are that Taufeeq Ahmad, husband of the appellant had taken two life insurance policies of Rs.1,00,000/ - and Rs.5,00,000/ - respectively from the opposite party. The insurance policy for Rs.5,00,000/ - also carried additional accident benefit of amount equal to the sum assured in the event of death of the life assured in an accident. The life assured unfortunately died in road accident on 02.08.1993. The appellant being nominee in the insurance policies submitted her insurance claims under both the policies. The insurance company allowed the insurance claim of Rs.1,00,000/ - but repudiated the claim of subsequent policy of Rs.5,00,000/ - on the premise that the said policy was obtained by the life assured by giving false information about his date of birth supported by a forged Transfer Certificate. The appellant made a representation against repudiation to Zonal Claim Review Committee of the Insurance Company and the Committee held the repudiation to be proper but recommended Rs.2,50,000/ - as ex gratia payment to the appellant provided the amount is accepted as full and final settlement of the claim.

(3.) THE respondent / opposite party in the written statement admitted that insurance policy of Rs.5,00,000/ - was issued in favour of Taufeeq Ahmad with accident death benefit of equivalent amount. It was also admitted that Taufeeq Ahmad died in a road accident. The respondent, however, pleaded that the insurance claim was rightly repudiated because life assured had obtained the insurance policy by giving false information about his age supported by a forged transfer certificate.