Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 36525
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF MARCH, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA WRIT PETITION NO. 21124 OF 2022 (GM-RES)
C/W WRIT PETITION NO. 21148 OF 2022 (GM-RES)
IN WP NO. 21124/2022 BETWEEN:
SMT. SHUBHA, W/O LATE MAHADEVAPPA @ NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT VARAKODU VILLAGE AND POST, VARUNA HOBLI, MYSURU TALUK AND DISTRICT - 570 010.
…PETITIONER (BY SRI. NANJUNDA SWAMY N, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE ZONAL MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA, SOUTH CENTRAL ZONAL OFFICE, 'JEEVAN BHAGYA', SAIFABAD, Digitally signed by BHARATHI HYDERABAD - 500 063.
S Location: HIGH 2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, COURT OF LIC OF INDIA, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, KARNATAKA 'JEEVAN PRAKASH', MYSURU - BENGALURU ROAD, BANNIMANTAPA, MYSURU - 570 015.
3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA, HUNSUR BRANCH, HUNSUR - 571 105.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. LINGARAJ H.S, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION TO QUASH THE LETTER/ORDER DATED 16.01.2021 BEARING NO.CLAIMS/DC/72C ISSUED BY THE R2 TO THE PETITIONER AT ANNEXURE-D AND ETC., IN WP NO. 21148/2022 BETWEEN:
SMT. UMAMAHESHWARI, D/O LATE MAHADEVAPPA @ NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/AT VARAKODU VILLAGE AND POST, VARUNA HOBLI, MYSURU TALUK AND DISTRICT - 570 010.
…PETITIONER (BY SRI. NANJUNDA SWAMY N, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE ZONAL MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA, SOUTH CENTRAL ZONAL OFFICE, 'JEEVAN BHAGYA', SAIFABAD, HYDERABAD - 500 063.
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, 'JEEVAN PRAKASH', MYSURU - BENGALURU ROAD, BANNIMANTAPA, MYSURU - 570 015.
3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, LIC OF INDIA, HUNSUR BRANCH, HUNSUR - 571 105.
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. LINGARAJ H.S, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3)
THIS W.P. IS FILED PRAYING TO QUASH THE LETTER/ ORDER DATED 16.01.2021 ISSUED BY THE R-2 TO THE PETITIONER AT ANNX-D AND ETC., THESE PETITIONS, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The above Writ Petitions are filed by the petitioners calling in question the repudiation made by the Respondent - Life Insurance Corporation of India1 of the policy of insurance standing in the name of husband and father of the Petitioners respectively .
2. It is the case of the Petitioners that consequent to the death of their husband and father, they made a claim for payment of the amount under the policy of insurance. The Respondent - LIC by its response has repudiated the claim on the ground that the deceased was suffering from a pre existing medical aliment and hence, refused to entertain the claim made by the Petitioners. Being aggrieved the petitioners have filed the present Writ Petitions.
3. It is forthcoming from the aforementioned that the question regarding the existence of a pre existing medical aliment which was reason for the repudiation of the policy being a factual one, the same cannot be adjudicated upon in
the present writ proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
4. However, the Writ Petitions are disposed of, reserving liberty to the Petitioners to avail remedies available to them under law including the remedy available under the Consumers Protection Act, 1986.
