SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

D.P.CHOUDHURY
Life Insurance Corporation of India – Appellant
Versus
Minati Senapati – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellants:M/s. R.K. Pattnaik & Associates, Advocate
For the Respondent:M/s. R.K. Sahoo & Associates, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Dr. D.P. Choudhury, President.—Heard learned counsel for both sides on V.C.

2. Here is an appeal filed u/s 15 of the erstwhile Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter called the ‘Act’). Parties to this appeal shall be referred to with reference to their respective status before the District Forum.

3. The factual matrix leading to the case of the complainant is that her husband Jitendriya Senapati had purchased “Janasurakhya policy with accident benefit” vide policy No. 586249840 commencing on 28.11.2005 for sum assured of Rs.50,000/-. Complainant alleged inter alia while life assured was sitting on the chair, he fell down on the ground and he became unconscious. Thereafter, he was shifted to District Headquarters Hospital, Bhadrak, then to Aditya CARE Hospital, Bhubaneswar and Kalinga Hospital Ltd., Bhubaneswar but succumbed to injury on 17.4.2013. where after the complainant made claim. OP after scrutiny of documents debited a sum of Rs. 63,141/- to the account of the complainant through RTGS. Complainant alleged that as the accident benefit required under the policy has not been given to the complainant, and he was forced to write letters on 17.9.2013 and 20.12.2013 f

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top