Partly allowed

The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Lko. Thru. Senior Divisional Manager v. State of U.P. Thru. Director General Institutional Finance,External Aided Projects,Lko. and 2 Ors.

Allahabad HC23 Sept 2024A227/3934/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 227, the High Court set aside the imposition of a weekly penalty on an insurance company for delayed payment of a death claim, holding that penalty was not warranted due to incomplete documentation later cured, while allowing the compensation claim.

What did the court decide?

The order of the Permanent Lok Adalat directing payment of Rs.1000/- per week as penalty was set aside; the direction to pay Rs.5,00,000/- as death compensation was affirmed.

The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Lko. Thru. Senior Divisional… — Insurance | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:66721

¶2

Court No. - 19

¶3

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3934 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Lko. Thru. Senior Divisional Manager Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Director General Institutional Finance,External Aided Projects,Lko. And 2 Ors. Counsel for Petitioner :- Maneesh Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rinku Verma

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

I.A. No.02 of 2024 - Application for substitution

¶7

Heard Sri Maneesh Pandey, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Hemant Kumar Pandey, the learned Standing Counsel for the State of U.P., Sri Rinku Verma, the learned counsel for the heirs of the deceased-opposite party no.3 and perused the records.

¶8

This is an application for substitution of the opposite party no.3.

¶9

Sri Rinku Verma, the learned counsel for the proposed heirs of the deceased-opposite party no.3, has no objections against the application.

¶10

Accordingly, the substitution application is allowed.

¶11

The learned counsel for the petitioner may carry out necessary amendments in the petition forthwith.

¶12

Order on petition

¶13

Heard Sri Manish Pandey, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Hemant Kumar Pandey, the learned Standing Counsel representing opposite parties no.1 and 2, Sri Rinku Verma, the learned counsel representing the heirs of the deceased-opposite parties no.3/1 to 3/3..

¶14

By means of the instant petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged validity of a judgement and order dated 27.05.2024 passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat, Lucknow in PLA Case No.327 of 2017, whereby the petitioner- the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. has been directed to pay Rs.5,00,000/- (Five Lacs) to the claimantsopposite party no.3 (since deceased) towards insurance amount consequent to death of her son, Yogesh Kumar. The Permanent Lok Adalat has also directed the petitioner to pay Rs.1000/- per week as penalty of the aforesaid amount.

¶15

The learned counsel for the petitioner has confined his submissions to assail the aforesaid order only to extent that if imposes penalty of Rs.1000/- per week upon the petitioner.

¶16

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Memorandum of Understanding entertain between the petitioner and the State of U.P. provides that 'the Insurance Company shall be liable to pay penalty for failure to make payment of the claim amount after submission of the claim along with all the relevant document'. He has submitted that the opposite party no.3 had submitted a claim stating that her deceased son was an agricultural labour. She had submitted a certificate of her income but the certificate of income of the deceased or the certificate of family income of the claimant was not submitted. At the time of filing of the claim petition, the claimant had already filed copies of the insurance contract, the FIR, inquest report, post-mortem certificate and death certificate, Parivar Register, her income certificate and the rejection letter. A copy of the income certificate of the deceased or of the claimants' family was not filed with the claim petition also. Later on, the claimant filed a copy of the BPL ration card issued to her.

¶17

Requirement of submission of income certificate does not apply to persons holding BPL card but till the BPL card was produced, the insurance company had need to know that the claimants were belonging to BPL category.

¶18

As the petitioner had repudiated the insurance the claim for the reason that the claimant had not submitted the entire relevant documents, which documents were not submitted even at the time of filing of the claim petition and were submitted later on, it is not a fit case warranting imposition of penalty on the petitioner.

¶19

Accordingly, the order dated 27.05.2024 passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat, so far as it directed the petitionerinsurance company to pay Rs.1000/- per week as penalty, is set aside. The remaining part of the order dated 27.05.2024 directing the petitioner to pay Rs.5,00,000/- as death compensation to the opposite party no.3, now opposite parties no.3/1 to 3/3, suffers from no illegality. Hence, it need not interference.

¶20

Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in part.

¶21

[Subhash Vidyarthi, J.]

¶22

Order Date :- 23.9.2024 KR

¶23

Digitally signed by :- RABINDRA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Lko. Thru. Senior Divisional Manager v. State of U.P. Thru. Director General Institutional Finance,External Aided Projects,Lko. and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Lko. Thru. Senior Divisional Manager v. State of U.P. Thru. Director General Institutional Finance,External Aided Projects,Lko. and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Taekwondo Federation of India, Lucknow Thru. Secy. General (Authorized Signatory) Jimmy R Jagtiani vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Institutional Finance, Lucknow and Others

Om Prakash Verma @ Guddu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.

Gulfam vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Smt. Komal Shahi vs Ankur Jaiswal

Mukundi Lal Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow and Others

Usman vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Lko. and 3 Others