Mamina Dai And Others vs Branch Manager, Indian Overseas Bank And Others

Arindam Sinha, J

Mr. Biswal, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner, whose husband died in road accident. Insurance claim was rejected by communication dated 7th February, 2020 of opposite party no.4. Delay in lodging claim was ground for rejection. On query from Court it is ascertained, said opposite party was not given notice of the writ petition.

Mr. Mohanty, learned advocate appears on behalf of opposite party nos. 1 to 3. He submits, his client is the intermediary. He relies on paragraph-8 of the counter for his submission. Paragraph-8 is reproduced below:

"Those, after the demise of the policy holder the petitioner's were applied to the answering opposite party bank for settlement of the insurance amount.

After verifying the documents and when the opposite party bank found about the genuine in claim the insurance sum assured amount paid and credited on dt.19.06.2020 in the account of the opposite party no.2, Rajesh Pradhan, who was the nominee against the said policy. The copy of the payment proof dt.19.06.2020 is filed herewith as ANNEXURE-A/1."

Mr. Biswal replies that there should be direction for payment of interest and costs. Mr. Mohanty reiterates, his client is only intermediary.

Opposite party no.4 insurance company had rejected the claim. It appears, thereafter, opposite party-Bank caused acceptance of it though averments in paragraph-8 of the counter seems to suggest the bank itself found the claim to be genuine. As such, what becomes clear is petitioner was unnecessarily harassed.

Issue notice upon opposite party no.4 along with copy of this order. Petitioner will put in requisites for service by speed post with AD. On returnable date there will be adjudication regarding direction for payment of interest and costs.

List on 23rd December, 2021.

....................................