Complaint Case No. 125/2015. Case: Radhika Saini Vs Life Insurance Corporation of India. Rajasthan State Consumer Forum SCDRC Cases
| Case Number | Complaint Case No. 125/2015 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: Gopal Shastri, Counsel and For Respondents: Vizzy Agarwal, Counsel |
| Judges | Nisha Gupta, J. (President) and Sunita Ranka, Member |
| Issue | Consumer Law |
| Judgement Date | January 12, 2017 |
| Court | Rajasthan State Consumer Forum SCDRC Cases |
Order:
Nisha Gupta, J. (President)
-
The complaint has been filed on 14.10.2015 with the contention that deceased husband of the complainant filled a proposal form on 8.8.2014 for the sum proposed for Rs. 25 lakhs. In July 2014 he was examined by Dr. Kamal Jain and found fit. A cheque dated 8.8.2014 for an amount of Rs. 10,169/- was accepted by the non-applicant as premium for the policy. On 14.8.2014 it was credited to the account of the non-applicant. On 19.9.2014 the husband of the present complainant died which was informed to the insurance company and claim was filed which was rejected on the ground that proposal was incomplete and hence, no liability is accrues.
-
The contention of the non-applicant is that complainant has not disclosed true facts before this Commission. Prior to the proposal form dated 8.8.2014 the deceased has submitted proposal form No. 1439 on 4.7.2014, the sum proposed for Rs. 50 lakhs which was declined by the non-applicant on 23.7.2014 as income was inadequate for the proposal. Again proposal form No. 3695 was presented by the deceased on 12.8.2014 with the non-applicant and the proposal deposit receipt No. 1281066 Ex. OP 3 was issued and it has also been admitted that amount was credited in the account of the non-applicant on 14.8.2014. The further contention of the non-applicant is that when proposal was received by the non-applicant on 12.8.2014 it was not possible for them to medical examine the deceased in July 2014 and the contention is false one. The further contention of the non-applicant is that money was accepted as advance money and for which the proposal deposit receipt was issued and it cannot be termed as premium for the policy as till death date the proposal was not accepted and as per agents manual the agents are authorized to accept the advance money equal to first premium and as per manual for account department a deposit memorandum was issued which has been submitted as Ex. OP 3. After receipt of the proposal No. 3695 it was considered by the authorities and on 27.8.2014 some requirements were found necessary which was communicated to the proposer on 18.9.2014. On 29.9.2014 a physician report dated 20.9.2014 was submitted and on the same date the application signed by the proposer was also submitted requesting change in the name of nominee. Ophthalmic report dated 12.9.2014 signed by the proposer was also submitted. On 1.10.2014 the counter offer was communicated to the proposer that the...
To continue reading
Request your trial