P.G.F. Limited vs Resham Devi

RESPONDENT /Complainant had filed a consumer complaint before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Jaipur, Rajasthan (for short, ''District Forum '') on the allegation that her son Ram Avtar Chaudhary (since deceased) had booked a plot measuring 1000 sq. yard on 22.3.2004 with the Petitioner/Opposite Party and respondent is the nominee. The entire value of the plot was paid in instalments to the petitioner as per the terms and conditions issued to the deceased. It is stated that on 5.10.2009 son of respondent was stabbed by some unknown person and subsequently he died. It has been alleged by the respondent that as per terms and conditions of the agreement, her son was insured by the petitioner and on his death petitioner is entitled to a sum of Rs.72,735/ -, the maturity amount and in addition thereto a sum of Rs.75,000/ - being the accidental compensation as per the agreement.

IN the written statement filed before the District Forum, petitioner has admitted that complainant ''s deceased son had booked the plot in question and they had also made the entire payment of the plot. It is further stated that deceased was entitled to get his full realization value of the property as per terms and conditions of the agreement, subject to furnishing all requisite documents. However, accidental death compensation cannot be given in the case of murder, because murder is not an accident.

THE District Forum allowed the complaint and directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.72,735/ - as maturity amount of the policy and in addition it also directed to pay Rs.75,000/ - as accidental death benefit/compensation. Being aggrieved, petitioner filed appeal before the State Commission which dismissed the same vide its impugned order dated 15.1.2014.

HENCE , this revision.

AFTER hearing authorized representative for the petitioner and going through the record, we find that the State Commission while dismissing the appeal of the petitioner has not given any reason at all as to on which basis it has dismissed the appeal of the petitioner.

HENCE , subject to petitioner ''s remitting a sum of Rs.7,500/ -(Rupees Seven Thousand Five Hundred only) by way of demand draft directly to respondent, being travelling and allied expenses, since respondent is a resident of Jaipur (Rajasthan), issue notice of the main petition as well as application for stay to the respondent for 18.12.2014.

IN the meantime, operation of the impugned orders passed by the State Commission shall remain stayed, subject to the condition that petitioner shall deposit the maturity amount of Rs.72,735/ - with the District Forum within four weeks , which amount the respondent shall be entitled to withdraw.

DASTI .