Rupa Sarkar vs Life Insurance Corporation Of India & Ors

This is a petition which has been presented by an unfortunate widow who has been left to her own devices after her husband died from Pancreatitis. The survivors of the family comprising a minor son at that point of time and herself depended upon what little money could be realized after selling the ornaments and such little cash which remained after defraying the medical expenses of the husband. It is her own case that on considering the representation made by the Life Insurance Corporation of India and particularly because under statute all sums assured by the Life Insurance Corporation of India were guaranteed by the Union of India she took out a policy being no.495092771 on her own life with survival benefits as mentioned in the policy. Annexure P-3 to the writ petition shows the nature of the policy along with the stamp duty which has been paid thereon. Annexure P-3 collectively also shows the first premium receipt issued by the Life Insurance Corporation of India. It is the case of the petitioner that she was entitled to be paid the first survival benefit upon completion of three years from the date of purchasing the insurance policy i.e. to say on March 11, 2016 but no payment of the said survival benefit was paid whether on that date or at all during the pendency of the writ petition. The time to make payment of the second survival benefit has also come and gone without payment.

The petitioner has disclosed at Annexure P-4 the allegation of the respondents that "as per available record, the above policy was completed fraudulently by withdrawing money from LIC and was under investigation of CBI, final report of which is still awaited.

Please bear with us."

This was dated November 28, 2017. But after that despite a demand for justice by electronic mail, being made as stated in the writ petition the respondents have maintained a stoic silence and have not done justice to the writ petitioner. The writ petitioner submits that a final report has been submitted by the Central Bureau of Investigation in respect of the above allegation of the Life Insurance Corporation of India which shows that the allegations are against Debabrata Roy, Susmita Roy, Angana Roy, Subrata Roy, Nirmal Chandra Roy and do not pertain to the present writ petitioner or her policy. This document was not a part of the writ petition. The writ petitioner who has taken a change from her learned Advocate is therefore given liberty to affirm a supplementary affidavit bringing on record this document (Final Report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 as amended) filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation before the 3rd Court, C.B.I, Bankshall, Kolkata and to serve a copy of the supplementary affidavit along with such document on the respondents through their learned Advocate.

Since the respondent authorities have not yet used any affidavit-in-opposition despite the order dated December 20, 2017 and the department has reported as late as on February 28, 2018 that no such opposition has been filed as of today it is clear that the case of the writ petitioner even without the supplementary affidavit stands admitted. Therefore it is an admitted position that for the internal problems of the Life Insurance Corporation of India the writ petitioner is being deprived of what is not merely a substantial portion of her livelihood but the entire consideration for which she had taken out the policy. Had the Life Insurance Corporation been a private operator the petitioner would not have placed such implicit trust upon it. It is only because the Life Insurance Corporation of India (respondent no.1) bears the imprimatur of an instrumentality of the Union of India and is established by a statute which guarantees the sums assured in the name of the Union of India that she entrusted last relics of her husband's memory in material form to the said Corporation. Prima facie she should not be made to suffer for that which is not her fault. There is nothing on record to show that she committed any fraud in order to have the said policy completed. Accordingly pending disposal of the writ petition the respondent no.1, particularly through the respondents no.2 and 3, shall release the first and second survival benefits in favour of the writ petitioner by an account payee cheque and/or by electronic transfer in her recorded bank account within a period of seven days from the date of communication of this order. This order shall not prevent the writ petitioner from renewing her prayer from getting interest on the first and second survival benefit at the bank rate from the date it has fallen due till its realization. The payment and its receipt should be without prejudice to the respective rights and contentions.

The supplementary affidavit directed as above shall be affirmed within a period of one week and shall be served thereafter on each of the respondents through their learned Advocates. The respondents shall have the liberty to file a combine affidavit-in-opposition to both the supplementary affidavit and the writ petition within a further period of three weeks from date. The matter shall appear in the monthly list of July, 2019.

The writ petitioner is granted liberty to engage her erstwhile learned Advocate if she so desires and so advised. The fixing of the date in the monthly list of July 2019 shall not prevent the writ petitioner to mention the matter if by some mischance the respondents do not comply with this order within the time mentioned above.

Photostat plan copy of this order, duly counter-signed by the Assistant Registrar (Court), be delivered to the petitioner, upon compliance of all formalities.