Your World of Legal Intelligence
 India | 1-800-335-6202

Case nº Revision Petition No. 1926 Of 2008, (Against the Order dated 22/01/2004 in Appeal No. 1163/2004 of the State Commission Rajasthan) of National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Wednesday November 30, 2016 (case Pushpa Devi Vs LIC of India and Anr.)

Judgment Cited in Precedent Map Related
JudgeFor Appellant: Mr. Narottam Vyas, Adv. and For Respondents: Ms. Manisha Tyagi, Adv.
PresidentDr. B.C. Gupta,Presiding Member
Resolution DateWednesday November 30, 2016
Issuing OrganizationNational Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Order:

Dr. B.C. Gupta, Member

  1. This revision petition has been filed u/s 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the impugned order dated 22.01.2008, passed by the Rajasthan State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (hereinafter referred to as ''the State Commission'') in First Appeal No. 1163/2004, "Pusha Devi versus LIC & Ors.", vide which, while dismissing the appeal, filed by the complainant, the order dated 11.05.2004, passed by the District Forum, Chittorgarh in CC No. 349 of 2003, dismissing the consumer complaint, was upheld.

  2. Brief facts of the case are that Murali Lal Vyas, the husband of the complainant Pushpa Devi was posted in the office of Assistant Director, Agriculture, Kapasan, Rajasthan, when he obtained an insurance policy of ₹50,000/- from the OP LIC under the Salary Savings Scheme, under which a premium of ₹300/- per month was to be deducted by the employer, i.e., the OP-2, Assistant Director, Agriculture (Extension). The said Murari Lal Vyas died on 26.09.98. The OP LIC refused to pay the claim after his death, saying that the policy had lapsed during his life time only, due to non-payment of premium. The LIC stated that only two monthly premiums had been paid under the policy, but the Policy-holder did not make any attempt to get the policy revived during his life time, although, he continued to receive his full salary and was fully aware that premium was not being deducted from his salary. The LIC also stated that it was the duty of the insured to provide Form 155 to the Department and to give them the right to deduct premium from his salary. The complainant filed the consumer complaint in...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT