STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION PUNJAB, DAKSHIN MARG, SECTOR 37-A, CHANDIGARH Date of Institution : 16.11.2022 Reserved on : 14.05.2024 Date of Decision : 11.06.2024

1. Harcharan Kaur aged about 48 years widow of Rajinder Singh, 2. Parbhjot Kaur aged about 25 years daughter of late Sh.

Rajinder Singh, 3. Monika aged about 23 years daughter of late Sh. Rajinder Singh, 4. Navneet Kaur aged about 21 years daughter of late Sh.

Rajinder Singh, 5. Harmanjot Singh aged about 15 years son of late Sh. Rajinder Singh, through his mother and natural Guardian Harcharan Kaur widow of Rajinder Singh, All residents of House No.412, Ward No.4, Morinda, Tehsil Morinda, District Rupnagar.

…..Appellants/Complainants Versus

1. Rajinder Kumar agent of Star Health and Allied Insurance Co.

Ltd., C/o Ankit Mobiles Railway Road, Opposite Dhiman Clinic, Morinda, Tehsil Morinda, District Rupnagar.

2. Star Health and Allied Insurance Company Ltd., Branch SCO

130/131, 4^th Floor, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh now shifted at SCO No.5A, 2^nd Floor, Sector 7, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh, through its Branch Manager.

…..Respondents/Opposite Parties Appeal under Section 41 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 to challenge the order dated 10.10.2022 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ropar in C.C. No.03 of 2021.

Quorum:-

Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Daya Chaudhary, President Ms. Simarjot Kaur, Member Present:-

For the Appellants : Sh. Anil Shukla, Advocate For the Respondents : Sh. Ravinder Arora, Advocate

1) Whether Reporters of the Newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes/No

2) To be referred to the Reporters or not? Yes/No

3) Whether judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY, PRESIDENT:-

The Appellants/Complainants namely Harcharan Kaur and 4 others being the LRs of deceased Rajinder Singh have filed the present Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (in short the “Act”) being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 10.10.2022 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ropar (in short the “District Commission”) in C.C. No.03 of 2021 vide which the Complaint filed by them had been dismissed.

2. Briefly, the facts of the case as made out by the Complainants before the District Commission which are necessary for disposal of the present Appeal are that deceased Rajinder Singh had purchased one Accident Care Policy on 26.09.2018 which was valid for the period w.e.f. 27.09.2018 to 26.09.2019 for total sum assured of Rs.50,00,000/-. The insured was running a drycleaner shop near Ramgarhian Gurudwara, Morinda. He was bitten by snake on 19.09.2018 and thereafter he was taken to Civil Hospital Morinda where he was given first aid by the Civil Hospital Morinda. Further, he was referred to PGI, Chandigarh and after giving treatment, he was discharged from PGI Chandigarh. Thereafter, he was again bitten by snake on 30.09.2018 and he was taken to Civil Hospital Morinda and was also referred to PGI Chandigarh where he remained admitted for the period w.e.f. 13.09.2018 to 02.10.2018. Thereafter, again he was bitten by snake on 21.10.2018 and was admitted in the PGI Chandigarh and ultimately had expired on the same day. DDR No.010 dated 19.12.2018 was registered at Police Station Morinda. The Complainant party visited the office of OP with request to pay assured amount of Rs.50,00,000/-. However, OP put off the matter on one pretext or the other and ultimately claim was repudiated vide letter/order dated 29.03.2019 on the ground that the deceased had died due to late reaction of earlier snake bite. Certain allegations of ‘deficiency in service’ on the part of OPs were also mentioned. The Complaint was filed with the prayer to pay claim amount of Rs.50,00,000/- with interest @18% per annum and also to pay Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation for causing physical and mental harassment as well as litigation expenses.

3. Upon issuing notice, written reply was filed wherein certain preliminary objections were ra