The importance of considering the circumstances of the insured and the complainant, particularly in cases of repudiation of life insurance claims.

Mr. Justice S.C. Mohapatra, President — Grievance of complainant is deficiency in life insurance service.

2. Admittedly, life of the deceased was covered f or Rs. 12,000/- on Money Back Scheme. Quarterly premiums were being paid. However, the 5th premium which was to be paid on 28.12.91 could not be paid by that date. There was a grace period for payment till 27.1.92. Unfortunately deceased fell ill since 6.1.92. His illness aggravated and continued and ultimately on 13.2.92 the insured died in S.C.B. Medical College & Hospital, Cuttack. Thus the last premium not having been paid, claim of the complainant has been repudiated.

3. Technically insurer is correct and there is no deficiency in service. However, insurer ought to have taken into consideration the status of the complainant who is widow hardly aged 32 years. Insured is a tea-shop owner only, in an economically backward class. While maintaining his life as such, he has expired on account of illness and could not pay the premium. If this fact could have taken into consideration, possibly the ex-gratia payment would be made by opposite parties. This aspect has not been taken into consideration since the materials were not with the opposite parties.

4. In the circumstances, Mr. Jena submits that he will made a representation to the Divisional Manager (O.P. 1) with all necessary documents and the O.P. 1 after making enquiry either himself pay the amount or recommend for payment to the higher authority. We hope that since two years have already been passed, an expeditious step will be taken by opposite parties to support the claim, preferably within six months from the date of representation of the complainant.

5. With the aforesaid observations, complaint is disposed of.

Complaint disposed of.

_