Disposed

T. Nesamani v. the Zonal Manager

Madras HC19 Dec 2016WP(MD)/15632/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Nesamani filed a writ petition seeking approval as legal heir and nominee of her deceased husband to receive LIC death benefits. Pending disposal, parties filed a joint memo agreeing to a settlement. The Court disposed of the petition directing the petitioner to furnish requested documents and the LIC to disburse the claim within four weeks based on the settlement.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of with a direction for the petitioner to submit documents and the LIC to disburse the death benefit claim within four weeks based on a joint settlement memo.

T. Nesamani Vs the Zonal Manager — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 19.12.2016

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAVICHANDRABAABU

¶6

W.P(MD)No.15632 of 2015 and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2015

¶7

T.Nesamani .. Petitioner

¶8

vs.

¶9

1.The Zonal Manager,

¶10

Life Insurance Corporation of India, 102, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.

¶11

2.The Branch Manager,

¶12

Life Insurance Corporation of India, Divisional Office, Utthamapalayam Branch Theni District.

¶13

3.The Senior Divisional Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India, Divisional office, Sellur,

¶14

Madurai District.

¶15

4.T.Lakshmi

¶16

(R4 is impleaded vide court order dated 04.10.2016 in WMP(MD)No.13660 of 2016)

¶17

... Respondents

¶18

PRAYER: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to approve petitioner as well as minor child Gopika as Legal Heirs and appointed as nominees and pay petitioner's deceased husband death benefit of LIC Bonds from 16.09.11 and to other related benefits on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 21.8.2015 with in the time fixed by this Court.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr. V.Mahendran For R1 to R3 : Mr. C.Godwin https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ For R4 : No Appearance

¶20

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

The petitioner seeks for a Mandamus directing the respondents to approve her as well as her minor child Gopika as Legal Heirs and nominees of her deceased husband to receive death benefit of LIC Bonds from 16.09.2011 and to other related benefits, on the basis of her representation dated 21.8.2015.

¶23

2.Pending disposal of the writ petition, the petitioner and the fourth respondent filed a joint memo, dated 08.11.2016, singed by them as well as by the respective counsels stating as follows:

¶24

“(2) The petitioner and the 4^th respondent jointly states that the present writ petition was filed by the petitioner to seek to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to disburse the amount of the LIC policies (746624110, 746624111, 746624112, 746624113, 746624114 and 746624118) of the deceased my husband by granting a one third each to the petitioner and her minor child and the 4^th respondent mother-in-law of the deceased.

¶25

(3) The 4^th respondent has been impleaded in this writ petition by the direction of this Hon'ble Court.

¶26

(4) The 4^th respondent has no objection to disburse death benefits to her daugher-in-law and granddaughter. The deceased is the son of the 4^th respondent, the petitioner is the daughter-in-law.

¶27

(5) The petitioner and the 4^th respondent jointly states that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to disburse the LIC benefits one third each to the petitioner and her minor child and the 4^th respondent mother-in-law of the deceased.

¶28

It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to accept this joint memo filed by the both parties and thus render justice.”

¶29

3.The learned counsel appearing for the LIC submitted that through proceedings, dated 30.11.2016, certain documents were sought for by the LIC for processing death claim. Therefore, he submitted that once those documents are furnished, the death claim will be disbursed as per the terms of the joint memo, dated 08.11.2016.

¶30

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that those documents sought for by the LIC would submitted by the petitioner without any further delay.

¶31

5.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ (a) the petitioner shall furnish the documents sought for by the LIC in the proceedings dated 30.11.2016, within a period of two weeks from the date

¶32

¶33

of receipt of a copy of this order. (b) on receipt of those documents, the LIC shall disburse the claim in accordance with the terms of joint memo filed by the petitioner and the fourth respondent, dated 08.11.2016, within a period four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶34

No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶35

Sd/

¶36

Assistant Registrar(RTI)

¶37

/True Copy/

¶38

Sub Assistant Registrar.

¶39

To, 1.The Zonal Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India, 102, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.

¶40

2.The Branch Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India, Divisional Office, Utthamapalayam Branch Theni District.

¶41

3.The Senior Divisional Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India, Divisional office, Sellur, Madurai District.

¶42

+1CC to M/S.C.Godwin, Advocate, SR.No. 81721 +4CC to M/S.V.Mahendran, Advocate, SR.No. 81709

¶43

W.P(MD)No.15632 of 2015 19.12.2016

¶44

skn AM/SKN/SAR-3/03.01.2017/3P/9C

¶45

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

T. Nesamani v. the Zonal Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T. Nesamani v. the Zonal Manager

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

Similar cases

Prabhakaran @ Pandiyan, Vs the District Registrar

G.Ganesan Vs the Commissioner

A. Saravanan Vs the Executive Officer

R. Susila Vs the Sub Registrar

H.Bonifas, Vs the Deputy Director

P.Maruthaiappan, Vs the District Collector