STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA Date of Institution: 16.01.2018 Date of final hearing: 18.05.2023 Date of Pronouncement: 18.05.2023 APPEAL NO.59 OF 2018 IN THE MATTER OF

1. Aditya Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Ltd. (formerly known as Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Limited), 6^th Floor, Claims Department, G-Corp tech park, Kasarvadvali Godhbunder Road, Thane West through Ms. Aakriti Manocha, Manager-Legal.

2. Aditya Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Ltd. (formerly known as Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Limited) Birla Sun Life Insurance Co. Ltd., Branch Office at SCO 9-10, II Floor, Sector 25, Panipat through Ms. Aakriti Manocha, Manager-Legal.

….Appellants/Opposite Parties Versus Sudesh Rani wife of late Shri Virender Singh, resident of Railway Road, Samalkha, Tehsil Samalkha, District Panipat.

….Respondent/Complainant CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN, PRESIDENT MS. MANJULA, MEMBER Present: Shri S.C. Thatai, counsel for the appellants.

Shri Pradeep Sharma, counsel for the respondent.

PER: T.P.S. MANN, J.

ORDER

1. The opposite parties i.e. Aditya Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Ltd. (formerly known as Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Limited), 6^th Floor, Claims Department, G-Corp tech park, Kasarvadvali Godhbunder Road, Thane West and Aditya Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Ltd., Branch Office, Sector 25, Panipat, have filed the instant appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for challenging the order dated 30.11.2017 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Panipat, whereby complaint preferred by complainant Sudesh Rani under Section 12 of the Act was accepted and the opposite parties directed to make the payment of accidental benefits under the insurance policy to the complainant within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of the order and the complainant was also held entitled for a sum of Rs.5,500/- for the mental harassment caused to her as well as the litigation expenses.

2. While filing the complaint, the complainant had averred that her husband, namely, late Shri Virender Singh was insured with the opposite party vide policy bearing No.006500090 dated 21.05.2014. The sum assured was Rs.9 lakhs along with benefits of Rs.6 lakhs for accidental death and disability as per the policy details. The premium was duly received by the opposite parties. The complainant stood appointed as nominee in the said insurance policy. The DLA Virender Singh died on 01.06.2014 due to electrocution. After the death of her husband, the complainant lodged claim with the opposite parties. All the documents demanded by the opposite parties were furnished by the complainant. The opposite parties paid only a sum of Rs.9 lakhs and the remaining claim regarding accidental death was not released in favour of the complainant despite repeated requests. This amounted to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. The complainant filed the complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and prayed for payment of claim along with compensation for the mental harassment caused to her.

3. Upon notice, the opposite parties appeared and filed their written version wherein preliminary objections regarding maintainability of complaint; concealment of true and material facts and cause of action were taken and accordingly the District Forum having no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the complaint. On merits, it was admitted that insurance policy stood issued and death of the DLA duly admitted. Payment of the sum assured was also admitted. The complainant had accepted the basic sum assured of Rs.9 lakhs from the opposite parties but since the death was not on account of accident because no post-mortem examination of the dead body of the DLA was got conducted by the complainant inspite of the fact that death was stated to be on account of electrocution (unnatural death) and possibility could not be ruled out that the DLA may have c