Back
D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, HEMANT GUPTA
Alka Shukla – Appellant
Versus
Life Insurance Corporation Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Dr Dhananiava Y Chandrachud, J.
The present appeal arises from a judgement of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission [NCDRC] which reversed the judgment of the Chhattisgarh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission [SCDRC]. The SCDRC had affirmed the view of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Durg [the District Forum] allowing an accident insurance claim.
2. The spouse of the appellant obtained three insurance policies from the Life Insurance Corporation of India [LIC of India]:
(i) New Bima Gold Policy;
(ii) LIC Jeevan Tarang Policy; and
(iii) Twenty Years Money Back Policy with profits and accident benefit.
The details of the policies are tabulated below:
Policy No
Policy Number
Date of Commencement
Total Term
Sum Assured (Rs)
Premium (in Rs)
1
Bima Gold Policy370473369
27.06.1992
75-20
50,000
3188/- yearly
2
LIC New Bima Gold Policy384067139
10.08.2006
178-10
2,00,000
21134/- yearly
3
Twenty Years Money Back Policy (with accident benefit) 385316764
11.01.2008
179-12
2,00,000
7641/- h
None of the provided case excerpts explicitly state that a case has been overruled, reversed, or abrogated.
Cases identified as being relied upon by counsel or courts for legal principles:
* **([Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Limited vs. ...]):** Treated as **Followed/Relied Upon**. The text states, "We have benefit of elucidation in this behalf arising from the judgment of this Court in Alka Shukla v. ...," indicating the court is using the precedent to clarify legal principles.
* **([Alka Shukla V. ...]):** Treated as **Followed/Applicable Law**. The text notes that "it is a settled principle that insurance claims depend upon the express..." and that the "respondents have heavily relied upon the decision," suggesting the precedent remains active and influential in current litigation.
* **([Harsh Kumar vs. ...]):** Treated as **Followed/Relied Upon**. The text notes that "Harsh Kumar has relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Alka Shukla," indicating the case continues to be used as a primary reference point in insurance disputes.
Cases where the scope or application of a precedent is clarified:
* **Susheela W/o Rajesh Kumar VS Union Of India - 2023 0 Supreme(Raj) 1215:** Treated as **Distinguished/Clarified**. The court observes that in the case of *Alka Shukla*, the "Apex Court did not decide the question regarding..." This terminology indicates that the court is limiting the scope of the cited precedent by clarifying which issues were not actually addressed in that specific ruling.
Cases providing independent legal standards:
* **MAHENDRA KUMAR ARORA VS ELECTRO REFRIGERATION ENGINEERS - Consumer (2004):** Treated as **Independent Principle**. This excerpt establishes a legal principle regarding tie-up arrangements and warranty liability. It does not reference the status of other case law, nor is it discussed in relation to the *Alka Shukla* precedent.
None. The treatment of each mentioned case is sufficiently described within the provided text segments to categorize them appropriately.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
