STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

U.T., CHANDIGARH

1. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. through its Senior Divisional Manager and having its Divisional Office at 13/46, Second Floor, Scindia House, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi 110001.
2. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. through its Branch Manager and having its Branch Office at SCO 1070-1071, Sector 22-B, Chandigarh 160022.

Both through the authorized signatory, The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Regional Office, SCO 36-37, Sector 17-A, Chandigarh.

                                      ...  Appellants/Opposite Parties No.1 & 2.

Versus

1. Prashant Rana son of Late Subash Chander Rana, House No.2179-2180, Second Floor, Sector 22-C, Chandigarh 160022.

….Respondent/Complainant.

2. Chandigarh Branch of Northern India Regional Council of Institute of Chartered Accountant of India through its Chairman and having its office at ICAI Bhawan, opposite Community Center, Sector 35-B, Chandigarh.

…. Respondent/Opposite Party No.3.

BEFORE:    JUSTICE RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI, PRESIDENT

                   MRS. PADMA PANDEY, MEMBER

                   MR. RAJESH K. ARYA, MEMBER

Present through Video Conferencing:-    

None for the appellants.

Sh. Surjeet Bhadu, Advocate for respondent No.1.

Respondent No.2 exparte vide order dated 26.06.2020.

PER  RAJESH  K.  ARYA,  MEMBER                

                   This appeal has been filed by opposite parties No.1 & 2 (appellants herein) against order dated 23.12.2019 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, U.T., Chandigarh (now District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission-II, U.T., Chandigarh) [in short ‘District Commission’] vide which Consumer Complaint No.30 of 2019 filed by the complainant (respondent No.1 herein) was allowed qua opposite parties No.1 & 2 in the following manner:-

“14]      From the entire facts & circumstances of the case, discussed and findings, as made in the preceding paragraphs, it is proved that the Opposite Party NO.1 & 2 have illegally repudiated the genuine claim in respect of the deceased insured late Subhas Chander and as such remained grossly deficient in rendering proper service to the complainant. Therefore, the present complaint is allowed against Opposite Party No.1 & 2 with following directions:

a)         To pay the sum insured amount of Rs.10 lacs to the legal heirs of the late             Sh.Subhash Chander (insured) in equal shares, along with interest @9% p.a. from the date of death i.e. 20.4.2018 till actual payment;

b)        To pay a compensation amount of Rs.15,000/- to the complainant for causing immense mental agony, harassment due to their deficient act;

c)         To pay litigation cost of Rs.10,000/-;

         This order shall be complied with by Opposite Party No.1 & 2 within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.”  

However, the complaint was dismissed against opposite party No.3 by the District Commission.

2.                The case of the complainant before the District Commission was that his father, namely, Sh. Subhash Chander Rana, a professional and practicing Chartered Accountant, was insured for a sum of Rs.10 Lakhs with Opposite Party No.1 through a ‘Group Personal Accident Insurance Policy’ bearing No.31120042170100000185, purchased by Opposite Party No.3 - Chandigarh Branch of NIRC of ICAI as a Master Policy and the complainant was appointed nominee under said policy.  Unfortunately, Sh. Subhash Chander Rana, residing on 2^nd Floor, while trying to get to the roof of the house by climbing a ladder, fell on the tiled floor area on the backside balcony of their second floor house due to slipping of the said ladder and his head was smashed against the tiled floor.  Consequently, he died on 19.4.2018.  At that time, all the family members were away. The residents of Ground Floor telephonically informed the complai