Divide insurance money equally among wife, son, mother: Consumer forum to firm
After LIC gave the entire assured sum of ₹15 lakh to the mother of the deceased man, his widow filed a complaint demanding her rightsUpdated: Nov 22, 2019, 01:27 IST
Observing that amount assured in policies should be distributed equally among the mother, wife and child of the deceased, the district consumer disputes redressal forum-I directed an insurance company to refund ₹10 lakhs, the amount insured towards their deceased client to a Panchkula resident and her son.
Deepika Dahiya from Sector 19, Panchkula and her two-year-old son Navdeep Singh (through his mother Deepika) filed a complaint against Life Insurance Corporation of India, Sector 17-B, Chandigarh and her mother-in-law Kamla Devi resident of Jind (Haryana).
In her complaint, Deepika mentioned that her husband Amardeep Singh died on January 4, 2018. Before the wedding, he had bought three life insurance policies from the firm. In these policies, he had nominated his mother, Kamla Devi as his nominee to receive the amount in the event of his death.
After her husband’s death, Deepika asked the firm to not disburse the sum assured in favour of Devi as she being the widow and her minor son are the legal heirs of the deceased man. However, the insurance firm disbursed the total amount of the policies amounting to ₹15,09,180 to her mother-in-law.
Describing it as deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, Deepika filed a complaint in the consumer court , asking it to direct the opposition party to refund the amount along with compensation and costs of litigation.
The insurance firm mentioned that since Kamla Devi was the nominee of the deceased, therefore as per provision of the relevant Act, the amount was disbursed to his nominee.Kamla Devi also claimed that since she was the nominee, so she was entitled to the sum assured.
The forum observed: “Keeping in view the factual and legal position, the sum assured in the three policies was to be apportioned amongst complainants No1 & 2 and OP-2 proportionately in equal shares. As such, OP-1 has also committed a deficiency in service and the liability of OPs would be joint as well as several as it tantamounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.”
The consumer forum directed the insurance firm to refund ₹5,03,060 each to Deepika and her minor son (i.e. 1/3 share of the total disbursed amount of ₹15,09,180) along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of disbursal.
It also directed the firm to pay ₹20,000 in compensation for causing mental agony and harassment to them, and also to pay ₹10,000 as costs of litigation.