Per Honble Mr. S. R. Khanzode, Judicial Member Heard Adv. Mrs. Urmila Sanil on behalf of the Appellant. Respondents as well as advocate for the respondents are absent. Perused the record.
[2] This appeal filed by the Appellant/original Opponent, United India Insurance Company Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the Insurance Company for the sake of brevity) takes an exception to an order dated 31/12/2004 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Sindhudurg (hereinafter referred to as the Forum for the sake of brevity) in Consumer Complaint No.114 of 2003, Smt. Manali Mohan Kadam and Others Vs. The Branch Manager, . It was a case of deficiency in service on theUnited India Insurance Company Ltd. and Another part of the Insurance Company who failed to honour an insurance claim made by the Respondents/original Complainants on the death of Mr. Mohan Balkrishna Kadam, who was the husband of the Respondent/original Complainant No.1, Smt. Manali Mohan Kadam and father of the Respondents/Complainants Nos.2 and 3, Master Chandrashekhar Mohan Kadam and Ms. Kishori Mohan Kadam (minor children) respectively. At the outset it may be mentioned that though in the original consumer complaint, the Opponent No.1 is shown as the Branch Manager, United India Insurance Company Ltd., said complaint was contested in effect by the Insurance Company and even the appeal is filed by the Insurance Company. Therefore, the lacuna of mis-description of the Opponent No.1 in the complaint looses its significance. The complaint was filed as against the Insurance Company and is fought accordingly.
[3] The Forum upheld the contention of the Respondents/original Complainants and awarded insurance claim of ` 1,00,000/- together with interest thereon @ 6% p.a. and further awarded compensation of ` 2,000/- towards mental distress and ` 1,000/- as costs. Feeling aggrieved by the impugned order, the Insurance Company preferred this appeal.
[4] Sole issue on which the insurance claim came to be repudiated is that under the Janata Personal Accident Insurance Policy death by suicide is not covered. The Respondents/Complainants categorically denied that it was a case of death by suicide. Insurance company perhaps wanted to rely upon the observations made in the Inquest Panchnama carried out by police authorities. Said Panchnama is not tendered in evidence and besides that observations of the Panchas in the Inquest Panchnama cannot be a conclusive piece of evidence regarding cause of death of Late Mr. Mohan Balkrishna Kadam. Post-mortem report of Late Mr. Mohan Kadam was inconclusive about the cause of death. Therefore, there is no evidence to show that Late Mr. Mohan Balkrishna Kadam committed suicide. It is revealed that behind the death of Late Mr. Mohan Kadam his wife was a prime-suspect but it cannot be a ground to hold or infer that Late Mr. Mohan Kadam had committed suicide. To justify the repudiation of the insurance claim the burden lies on the Insurance Company which the Insurance Company failed to discharge. Under the circumstances, we find no reason to take a different view than what is taken by the Forum and thus, finding the appeal devoid of any substance, we pass the following order:- ORDER Appeal stands dismissed. No order as to costs. Pronounced on 12 October, 2012th [HON'BLE Mr.Justice S.B.Mhase] PRESIDENT [HON'BLE Mr. S.R. Khanzode] Judicial Member [HON'BLE MR. Narendra Kawde] MEMBER