release the death claim also. It is submitted that the policy remained in force upto 28.09.2020 i.e. also date of death of said Harminder Kaur. The opposite parties used to make lame excuses and intentionally not released the payment of death claim and they made the payment of Rs.1,32,763/- on 27.08.2021 only i.e. maturity value. It is submitted that the complainant is also entitled for death claim of Rs.1,00,000/- being sum assured against the said policy. It is submitted that the complainant has put his signatures on pre-printed blank claim form as per saying the officials of the opposite parties at the time of lodging the claim. The complainant also sent emails to the opposite parties but to no effect. This act and conduct of the opposite parties amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, which compelled the complainant to approach the District Commission seeking following reliefs:

i) to release the amount of death claim of Rs.1,00,000/-

against the said life insurance policy, in question, as detailed;

ii) to pay Rs.2,00,000/- as damages for mental agony and monetary loss suffered by the complainant; and iii) to pay Rs.50,000/- as litigation expenses.

3. Upon notice, opposite parties appeared and filed their joint written reply taking preliminary objections that the complainant has no locus standi to file this complaint. It is submitted that as per policy record Smt.Harminder Kaur purchased the said policy in her name on 28.09.2000 for S.A. of Rs.1,00,000/- by paying the yearly premium of Rs.7,587/-. The premiums were to be paid upto 09/2019 and thereafter no premium of the policy was due to be paid by the deceased life assured (DLA) as 28.09.2020 was date of maturity. Premiums under the policy have been paid for full 20 years being the term of the policy. Intimation was given by the claimant and necessary discharge vouchers for payment dated March, 2021 was duly signed and executed by Gangpreet Singh without any protest. After checking the time and date only the amount of maturity was payable under the policy and the same was paid to the nominee/claimant @ Rs.1,30,600/- with interest @ Rs.2,163.00 on 26.08.2021. In this manner, the complaint does not lie and thus become infructuous as the maturity claim was paid with interest. The complainant is estopped by his act and conduct to file the complaint. He is also guilty of acquiescence as the complainant without protest signed the discharge voucher and received the maturity claim on 26.08.2021. The complainant has not come to the Commission with clean hands as he has suppressed the material and relevant facts. On merits, all the averments as averred by the complainant in his complaint were denied and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

4. The parties led their evidence in support of their respective contentions before the District Commission and after hearing the contentions of the parties, the complaint was allowed, vide impugned order dated 28.02.2023.

5. Aggrieved by the said order, this appeal has been filed by the appellants/opposite parties for setting aside the impugned order dated 28.02.2023 and to allow their appeal.

6. We have heard the contentions of the parties and have carefully gone through the record as well as written arguments filed by them. We have also given our thoughtful consideration to the same.

7. The respondent/complainant filed the complaint before the District Commission claiming the death claim of his mother Mrs.Harminder Kaur (hereinafter called as ‘DLA’), who died on 28.09.2020, as per Death Certificate, Ex.C-2. It is alleged that the DLA was a holder of LIC Policy bearing No.131377385, Ex.C-3, which is commenced on 28.09.2000 and was to be matured on 28.09.2020 as the Policy Certificate. The term of the policy was 20 years. These facts are not controverted by any of the party, however, the respondent/complainant has alleged that only the amount of maturity of Rs.1,32,763/- has been paid by the appellants/ opposite parties, vide Ex.C-