Court : Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
SHRI. M.V. VISWANATHAN JUDICIAL MEMBER The above appeal is preferred from the order dated 06-09-2002 passed by CDRF, Thiruvananthapuram in OP No. 416/2000. The compliant therein was filed by the appellant herein as complainant against the respondents/opposite parties alleging deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties. It was alleged that the repudiation of the insurance claim put forward by the complainant as nominee of the life assured would amount to deficiency of service and that the entrustment of the premium with the 3rd opposite party LIC Agent is to be treated as effective payment of the premium for the insurance policy. Thus, the complaint in OP 416/2000 was filed to get the insurance amount with 12% interest and compensation of Rs. 5,000/- and cost of the proceedings. 2. The opposite parties 1 and 2 filed written version denying the alleged defiency of service. They contended that the policy issued infavour of V. Radhakrishnan, the son of the complainant Ragini...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU, PRESIDENT The appellant is the opposite party/LIC in OP No. 31/2005 in the file of CDRF, Alappuzha. The appellant is under orders to pay the policy amounts with interest at the rate of 9% from 24-02-2005 and costs of Rs. 900/- 2. It is the case of the complainant that she is the nominee of the endowment assurance policy issued by the second opposite party on 03-06-2003 to her husband with the assured sum of Rs. 3,00,000/-. On payment of the annual premium of Rs. 26,428/-, the policy commenced on 22-05-2003. The second annual premium was due on 22-05-2004. The assured was employed in Kuwait. The policy was taken through the 3rd opposite party, LIC agent. In June 2004, the 3rd opposite party agent reminded the complainant with respect to the second premium and the premium amount of Rs. 26,428/- to be deposited within the grace period. The assured died in Kuwait on 12-10-2004 in a road traffic accident. The claim was repudiated as the amount collected by the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
P.Q. Barkath Ali, President This is an appeal filed Under Section 15 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 by the opposite parties, Life Insurance Corporation of India in CC.No.191/2011 on the file of Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Wayanad challenging the order of the Forum dated 17/03/2012 by which the Forum directed the appellant to pay to the complainant Rs.1,50,000/- being the accident benefit due under a policy taken by Sudheer, the brother of the complainant who died in an accident. The case of the respondent / complainant as testified by him as PW1 and as detailed in the complaint before the Forum is brief is this: PW1, the complainant is the nominee of an accident benefit policy, Ext.B1 dated:25.04.2004 of his brother Sudheer. The sum assured was Rs.1,00,000/- with bonus. The condition of the policy is that if insured dies in an accident, the nominee will be entitled to an additional amount equal to the sum assured plus bonus. Another condition is that if the insured dies 6th to ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
P.Q. BARKATH ALI : PRESIDENT This is an appeal filed under section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by the opposite party in CC.479/10 on the file of CDRF, Ernakulam challenging the order of the Forum dated, October 27, 2011 directing the appellant to pay to the complainant Rs.5 lakhs being the amount due under the Insurance policy Ext.A1. 2. The case of the complainant as detailed in the complaint and as stated in his proof affidavit before the Forum in brief is this: The respondent/complainant took a Jeevan Anand Policy of Life Insurance Corporation of Indiawith profit and accident benefit on March 25, 2006. He paid the premium of Rs.26,068/-. He opted for critical illness and premium benefit rider by remitting additional premiums of Rs.3700.12 and Rs.1959.21 respectively. The sum assured was Rs.5 lakhs. The complainant underwent open heart surgery on February 5, 2007 at MedicalTrust Hospital, Ernakulam. Towards treatment expenses is spent Rs.1,83,000/-. But his claim for crit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
SRI. S. CHANDRA MOHAN NAIR, MEMBER The CDRF, Kozhikode, as per its order dated 18.05.2000 in O.P.53/2000, has directed the opposite parties to give pension to the complainant at Rs.433/- per month from 01.04.1998 with cost of Rs.500/- within two months from the date of the order and it is aggrieved by the said direction that the present appeal is filed by the opposite parties. 2. The complainant has approached the Forum stating that he was an employee of the opposite parties and that after retirement he was eligible to get pension @ Rs.433 per month and after commutation he was getting only Rs.313/- per month till 01.04.1998. It is his case that after the commutation period of 10 years is over he is entitled to get back the original pension of Rs.433/- per month and the opposite parties had declined the said payment. It is also his case that he was getting only Rs.313/- per month and alleging deficiency of service, the complaint was filed for directions to the opposite parties to give ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
COMMON JUDGMENT SHRI. M.V. VISWANATHAN : JUDICIAL MEMBER The above appeals are preferred from the order dated:29.5.2006 of the CDRF, Ernakulam in CC.614/05. The complaint therein was filed alleging deficiency of service on the side of the opposite parties in getting deposit of Rs.4,41,012/- by making the complainant to believe that the said deposit is towards the one time investment having the added benefits of insurance coverage, loan facility etc; that the complainant received a renewal premium notice dated:28.4.2005 from M/s Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Ltd for effecting deposit of insurance premium; that the complainant came to understand that the deposit of Rs.4,41,012/- effected was not as one time investment. Hence the complainant filed the complaint in CC.614/05 to refund of the said sum of Rs.4,41,012/- with interest and cost of Rs.5000/-. 2. The 1st opposite party filed written version denying the alleged deficiency in service. It was contended that the payment of Rs.4,41...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
P.Q. Barkath Ali, President This is an appeal filed under Section 15 of Consumer Protection Act of 1986 by the opposite parties/Life Insurance Company in CC.No.190/11 on the file of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Wayanad challenging the order of the Forum Dated, 17th March, 2012 by which the Forum directed the appellant to pay to the complainant Rs.1,00,000/- the accident benefit due under policy taken by Sudheer, the brother of the complainant, who died in an accident. 2. The case of the respondent/complainant as testified by her as PW1 and as detailed in the complaint before the Forum in brief is this: 3. PW1, the complainant is the nominee of accident benefit policy, B1, dated:25.4.2004 f her brother Sudheer. The sum assured was Rs.1,00,000/- with bonus. The condition in the policy is that if insured dies in an accident the nominee will be entitled to an additional amount equal to sum assured in addition to the sum assured with bonus. On 1.4.2010 the insured fell down in the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
JUSTICE SHRI. K.R. UDAYABHANU : PRESIDENT The complainants are the L.R.S. (wife and children) of the deceased Sasidharan who had availed an L.I.C. policy from the opposite parties 1 to 4/L.I.C. authorities. A sum of Rs. 35 lakhs is claimed towards the assured sum and a sum of Rs. 1 lakh as compensation and 10,000/- as cost. 2. The deceased died on 17.1.2004in an accident. It is stated that he was a PWD contractor. The first complainant is the wife and the rest are the children. It is alleged that the 6th opposite party Abdul Asharaf/L.I.C. agent was a close friend of the deceased and that he used to visit their house frequently and he is very familiar to them for the past 8 years. The above agent is a Member of the Panchayat wherein the complainants are residing. The above agent/6th opposite party used to persuade the assured to avail an L.I.C. policy. Meanwhile on 6.3.2002, the deceased met with a bike accident and was hospitalized. He got fully recovered from the injuries and the opp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
SHRI. M.K. ABDULLA SONA : MEMBER This appeal prefers from the order passed by the CDRF, Thrissur in CCNo. 538/07 date 27-09-2010. The appellant is the opposite party who prefers to this appeal under the direction of the forum below that the opposite party directed to pay the Double Accident Benefit with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of complaint till realization with cost of Rs. 750/- with in 2 months from the date of receipt of copy of the order of the forum below.The respondent is the complainant in the above mentioned case. 1. This dispute araised from a repudiaion of the Double Insurance Benefit claim by the complainant by the opposite party. The complainants husband took an insurance policy from the opposite party for a sum assured of Rs. 2,00,000/- and added additional Double Accident Claim as per the clause 10(b) of the policy which commenced on 28-05-2002. The insured Vargheese was murdered on 9-06-2005 at 9.25 hours at Thanikudom is on 28-02-2022. The lif...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Thiruvananthapuram
JUSTICE SHRI.K.R.UDAYABHANU,PRESIDENT The appellants are the complainants in CC.56/06 in the file of CDRF, Thiruvananthapuram. The complaint stands dismissed. 2. The complainants are the LRs of the deceasedun Cap. Anil Prakash who was working at the Kerala Aviation Training Centre, Thiruvananthapuram. He was having a credit card of City Bank from the year 2000. He died in an air crash at Hyderabadon 29.12.04. The credit card holder had the protection of Suraksha Credit Shield and Suraksha Personal Accident Benefits. The deceased was remitting the premium periodically. Subsequently, he joined Andhra Pradesh Aviation Academy. The first opposite party had sought for the relevant records for settling the death benefits. On 8.4.05 the second opposite party, the Manager of the Customer Care wing of the first opposite party has informed that the air accident Insurance has been withdrawn from the New India Insurance Company and for further clarifications the first complainants/wife may contact...
Tag this Judgment!