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

C.VISWANATH, RAM SURAT RAM MAURYA
Master Nikhil Sharma – Appellant
Versus
PNB Metlife India Insurance Co. Ltd. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Complainant:Mr. Vikas Mishra, Advocate
For the Opp. Party No.1:Mr. D. Varadarajan, Advocate
For the Opp. Party No.2: Mr. Rajat Prakash, Proxy Counsel

ORDER

The present Complaint is filed by the Complainant Nikhil Sharma through his father Sh. Ajay Sharma. The Complainant was the nominee in the Insurance Policy taken his deceased grandfather Sh. Gopal Dass. Opposite Party No.1 is Insurance Company. Opposite Party No.2 is a Bank engaged inter alia in providing financial facilities to its Customers.

2. The case of the Complainant is that the representative of Opposite Party No.1 approached and visited the deceased grandfather of the Complainant at the behest of Sh. Jairam and Sh. Pardeep Kr. Shukla, the then Branch Manager and Asst. Manager respectively in Karnataka Bank Ltd., Varanasi, Opposite Party No.2. They assured the credibility of M/s Metlife India Insurance Company Limited, as highly reputed and esteemed Insurance Company in the field of Life Insurance. On their advice, Mr. Gopal Dass took three MetLife Life Insurance Policies on following terms:-

S. No.

 

Policy Particulars of Sh.

Gopal Dass (Deceased

Father)

Sum Assured

Annual

Premium

Tenure

Premium

till Death

1.

Met Smart Plus Life

Insuranc

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