NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION NEW DELHI RESERVED ON: 12.01.2026 PRONOUNCED ON: 22.01.2026 REVISION PETITION NO. 793 OF 2018 (Against the Order dated 02.11.2017 in Appeal No.19/2015 of the Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Patna)

Life Insurance Corporation of India Through its Additional Secretary (Legal)

Central Office, H-39 (First Floor), New Asiatic Building, Connaught Circus, New Delhi-110001. .… Petitioner Versus Nandlal Tiwari S/o Late Avdesh Tiwari, Village Baulia, P.O. Nauhatta, Dist. Rohtas, Bihar-821311. .… Respondent BEFORE:

HON’BLE AVM JONNALAGADDA RAJENDRA, AVSM, VSM (Retd)

PRESIDING MEMBER HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, MEMBER For Petitioner : Mr.Avanish Kumar, Advocate For Respondent : Mr.Parveen Kumar Mehdiratta, Advocate

JUDGMENT

AVM JONNALAGADDA RAJENDRA, AVSM, VSM (Retd), MEMBER

1. This Revision Petition has been filed under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (the “Act”) against the order of Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Patna („State Commission‟) dated 02.11.2017 in FA No. 19/2015 dismissing the Appeal filed by the Petitioner/OP and affirmed the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtas-Sasaram, („the District Forum‟)

order dated 06.01.2015 which partly allowed the complaint.

2. For convenience, the parties are referred to as placed in the original Complaint filed before the District Forum.

3. Brief facts of the case, as per the complainant, are that his wife, Kamala Devi, had obtained three insurance policies from L.I.C., Dehri- on-Sone Branch, namely a Money Back Policy, Jeevan Sathi, and Jeevan Anand, bearing Policy Nos. 513897911 for Rs. 51,000/-; 513534219 for Rs. 1,00,000/-; and 513520931 for Rs. 1,00,000/-, which commenced on 28.01.2004, 15.06.2004, and 23.09.2004 respectively. The policies covered the life of his wife, who unfortunately died on 25.09.2004 at about 4:00 A.M. after suddenly falling ill the previous night. The complainant informed the L.I.C. office, submitted the death certificate, claim form, affidavit as nominee, and other required documents, and repeatedly approached the office for settlement of the claim. As no payment was made, he served a legal notice dated 12.01.2009, which was replied to on 08.12.2009 without any settlement, compelling him to file a case before the District Forum claiming the insured amount of Rs. 2,51,000 along with damages and compensation. 4. The OPs, in their Written Version, contested the claim, asserting that the complaint is not maintainable, time-barred, and devoid of cause of action. The OPs contended that the complainant suppressed material facts regarding the prior illness of the insured, who died within two days of obtaining the last policy, thereby raising serious suspicion. It was further contended that the policies had lapsed due to non-payment of premiums and that the complainant failed to submit necessary documents despite repeated requests. The OPs also pointed out discrepancies regarding the insured‟s age, occupation, and personal details, necessitating further investigation through Form B or B-1, which the complainant allegedly failed to provide. On these grounds, the opposite parties prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

5. The learned District Forum vide Order dated 06.01.2015 partly allowed the complaint with the following directions:-

“14. Hence the claim of the complainant is accepted and O.P. No.2 to 5 is hereby directed to pay Rs.2,51,000/- amount as policy amount Rs.20,000/- against the mental tension and economic loss and Rs.5000/- Thousand as cost of litigation total 2,76,000/- within two months since the date of order. In case of not payment within the stipulated period, the complainant shall entitled to get 9% interest thereon.

(Extract from translated copy)

6. Being aggrieved by the District Forum order, the OPs filed Appeal No.19 of 2015 and the State Commission vide order dated 02.11.2017 dismissed the Appeal with following observations:

“4. He