The right of a nominee to insurance proceeds does not override the claims of legal heirs in the absence of clear intent from the deceased.

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. M.F.A.No.7994/2024 is filed by the defendant No.3 calling in question the order passed on I.A.No.4 filed under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of Code of Civil Procedure in O.S.No.2856/2024 pending on the file of V Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, an order of temporary HC-KAR injunction is granted with a condition that the 3^rd defendant shall deposit Rs.4,00,00,000/- (Rupees Four Crores only) to the Court account within 30 days received from the defendant No.2 upon the death claim of late K.C.Raghu accrued under insurance policy No.607405885.

2. M.F.A.No.768/2025 is filed by the plaintiffs No.1 and 2 calling in question the order passed on I.A.No.4 filed under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of Code of Civil Procedure in O.S.No.2856/2024 pending on the file of V Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru, being aggrieved only so far as the order at clause 3 of the operation portion giving liberty to defendant No.3 to receive the interest accrued on the amount under the policy.

3. The plaintiffs have filed the suit for permanent injunction directing the defendant No.3 to release the death claim under the policy No.607405885 of late K.C.Raghu for an amount of Rs.4,00,00,000/- and for other reliefs.

HC-KAR

4. It is the case of the plaintiffs that the plaintiffs No.1 and 2 are the wife and daughter of one late K.C.Raghu. It is the case of the plaintiffs that the mother of the defendant No.3 was an ex-employee under K.C.Raghu which he was running a firm and therefore, not related to anywhere else to the plaintiffs and late K.C.Raghu. It is the case of defendant No.3 that she is the daughter of late K.C.Raghu through her mother Asha.K.S. It is the case of the defendant No.3 that the said K.C.Raghu during his life time has purchased a policy bearing No.607405885 for insuring an amount of Rs.4,00,00,000/- and made defendant No.3 as a beneficial nominee. Therefore, it is dispute between the plaintiffs and defendant No.3 that the plaintiffs are prima facie wife and daughter of late K.C.Raghu whereas the defendant No.3 is daughter of late K.C.Raghu and Asha.K.S by virtue of nominee found in the said policy No.607405885, the defendant No.3 had putforth her claim to claim the insurance amount of Rs.4,00,00,000/- to the plaintiffs HC-KAR No.1 and 2 but claiming that she is the daughter and made as beneficial nominee in the said policy. This is objected by the plaintiffs, but in the mean time, the defendants/Life Insurance Corporation of India have released the said amount of Rs.4,00,00,000/- to the account of defendant No.3, then, the plaintiffs have filed the suit for mandatory injunction seeking direction to defendant No.3 to release the amount in favour of plaintiffs. The plaintiffs have filed an application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of CPC for order of temporary injunction directing the defendant No.3 to deposit an amount of Rs.4,00,00,000/- received for claim under the policy No.607405885 before the Court till disposal of the suit.

5. The Trial Court after considering the rival claim on the interlocutory application has allowed the application I.A.No.4 with a certain directions that directing the 3^rd defendant shall deposit an amount of Rs.4,00,00,000/- to the Court account received from the defendant No.2 in HC-KAR respect of death claim of late K.C.Raghu under the above said policy and also liberty has ordered reserving liberty to the defendant No.3 to receive the interest accrued on the amount of Rs.4,00,00,000/- on quarterly basis from the date of deposit till disposal of the suit.

6. The defendant No.3 has filed the above appeal being aggrieved by the portion of order of temporary injunction issuing direction to def