(1)

wp520.21.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

932 WRIT PETITION NO.520 OF 2021

WITH

WRIT PETITION NO.533 OF 2021

VAISHALI SANJAY GHADGE

VS

BRANCH MANAGER, LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF

INDIA, LTD

Mr. M. D. Shinde, Advocate for the petitioner

Mr. S.B. Pulkundwar, AGP for the respondent/State

CORAM :

N. J. JAMADAR, J.

DATE :

04-03-2021

P. C.

.

These petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution of

India assail the orders passed by the Permanent Lok-Adalat,

Aurangabad, Aurangabad in Pre-Litigation Application Dispute No.25

of 2019 and 26 of 2019, whereby the Permanent Lok-Adalat was

persuaded to dismiss the applications preferred by the petitioner

under Section 22(C)(1) of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987

for grant of assured amount under the policy of insurance reckoning

death to be an accidental death. Shorn of superfluties, the

background facts leading to these petitions can be stated as

under:-

a.

Sanjay Ghadge (deceased), was the husband of the

1 of 7

(2)

wp520.21.

petitioner. He was a Medical practitioner. He ran a clinic at Loni

(Kh). It is the claim of the petitioner that on 28-11-2018 after he

returned from his clinic on account of stress of the work the

deceased suffered heart-attack and on being shifted to Ghati

Hospital, Aurangabad, he was pronounced dead. The cause of death

was certified as “Coronary Artery Insufficiency”.

b.

During his life time, the deceased had taken two

policies. One, under a plan “Jeevan Mitra” being policy

No.968530631 with an assured amount of Rs.2,00,000/-. Second,

under the plan of “Jeevan Saral Plan” being policy no. 985219674

with an assured sum of Rs.5,00,000/-. Under the first policy,

insurer had undertaken the liability to pay the compensation which

would be three times of the assured amount in the event of natural

death and four times of assured amount in the event of accidental

death. Under the second policy insurer had undertaken the liability

to pay the assured amount of Rs.5,00,000/- in case of natural

death and in the event of accidental death a further sum of

Rs.5,00,000/- alongwith accrued bonus. Since, the respondent-

insurer processed the claims and paid the amount reckoning death

to be natural death and declined the claim of the petitioner that the

deceased suffered accidental death on account of stress and strain

of the professional duties, the petitioner preferred applications

under Section 22 (C)(1) before the Permanent Lok-Adalat.

c.

By the impugned order dated 20-07-2019, the

2 of 7

(3)

wp520.21.

Permanent Lok-Adalat rejected the applications holding interalia

that there was no material to indicate that the deceased suffered an

accidental death and, in any event, disputed questions of fact could

not be decided by the Permanent Lok-Adalat in summary

proceeding. Resultantly, the terms of possible settlement could not

be formulated and hence the applications were rejected.

2.

Being aggrieved the petitioner has preferred these

petitions.

3.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

4.

A strenuous efforts was made on behalf of the petitioner

to draw home the point that though the deceased died on account

of heart-attack, yet it cannot be completely disassociated from

stress and strain which the deceased underwent while discharging

his professional service. The death which the deceased suffered on

account of “Coronary Artery Insufficiency” is a culmination of the

said stress and strain. Therefore, respondent was not justified in

rejecting the claim based on accidental death of Sanjay Ghadge.

5.

In order to lend support to the aforesaid submissions

learned counsel for the petitioner placed a strong reliance on the

judgment and order of the Supreme Court in the case of Mst.

Param Pal Singh through Father Vs National Insurance Co.

and anr reported in 2013 AIR SCW 28