PAWAN KUMARI WIDOW OF LATE SHRI KISHAN BABU, TEHSIL ROAD BALAJI MARKET MOHDA AND VILL. SISOLAR, TEHSIL MODHA, DISTRICT Vs. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA & ANR. THROUGH BRANCH MANAGER, BRANCH MAHOWA, 114 GANDHI NAGAR, MAHOWA, DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two first appeals have been filed against the impugned order dated 27.5.2015, passed by the Uttar Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Lucknow (hereinafter referred as ‘State Commission) vide which, the complaints filed by the present appellant in Case No.150 of 1998 and Case No.151 of 1998 were allowed, and it was stated that the petitioner shall be paid interest on the three life insurance policies taken by her husband from 28.11.1998 to 16.11.2000, along with interest @ 9% per annum in addition to Rs. 10,000.00 as cost of litigation.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the husband of the petitioner Kishanbabu Shivhare obtained three life insurance policies from the opposite party (OP Life Insurance Corporation of India) (hereinafter referred as LIC) as per the following details:-

(3.) The said Kishanbabu Shivhare was murdered on 21.3.1995 in a property dispute with some persons in his area. The petitioner filed claim under the three policies to the LIC for getting the sum insured, along with accidental benefit and bonus. On the failure of the LIC to pay the claim, the consumer complaint was filed before the State Commission. During the proceedings before the State Commission, the LIC filed their written statement stating that they had already approved death claim along with bonus payable under the said policies and the same had been offered several times for payment to the complainant, but she avoided receiving the same. The LIC took the stand that the claimant was not entitled to the ‘accident benefit under the policies because it was a death due to murder " and not a case of ‘accidental death. The State Commission observed in the impugned order that the sum insured including bonus, amounting to Rs.11,26,332.00 had already been released to the petitioner by the Insurance Co. on 16.11.2000. The State Commission ordered that simple interest should be paid on the said amount @ 9% p.a. for the period 28.11.1998 to the date of payment, i.e., 16.11.2000. The State Commission also held that the petitioner was not liable for accidental claim separately as compensation. Being aggrieved with this order, the petitioner is before this Commission by way of the present two appeals.