Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 264 (CAL)

Seuli Maity v. Life Insurance Corporation of India

2024-02-05

SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA

body2024
JUDGMENT : 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the widow of a deceased person who died in an unfortunate avalanche in Sikkim. 2. The petitioner claims her share in the insurance amount on the demise of her husband, on behalf of herself and her minor son. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the LICI submits by placing reliance on Section 39 of the LICI Act that the norm is that the nominees are the receiving hands. 4. The petitioner has relied on the judgment of Smt. Sarabati Devi and another vs. Smt. Usha Devi reported at AIR 1984 SC 346 , where it was reiterated by the Supreme Court that nomination merely indicates the receiving hands but the legal heirs of the deceased are not deprived of their rights to the amount of claim. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the parents of the deceased policy holder, who are also the nominees of the policy, submit that in spite of their best efforts, the petitioner with her son are not coming to her matrimonial home, thereby depriving the private respondents from the company of their grandson. 6. It is further reiterated that the dues of the grandson of the private respondents should be kept in a fixed deposit, to be used by the said grandson when he becomes major. 7. Learned counsel for the LICI, however, takes a stand that as per the Hindu Succession Act, there are three heirs of the deceased, that is, the petitioner-wife, the minor son and the mother of the deceased. 8. The settled law is that the nominees are the receiving hands and in normal circumstances the Insurance Company is to disburse the entire amount to the nominees. 9. The other legal heirs, if any, of the deceased can then claim such amount from the nominees. 10. However, in the instant case, the predicament of the widow of the deceased, who is to survive along with her minor son, is precarious. 11. If procedure and paraphernalia are permitted to come in the way of substantial justice, the equity jurisdiction of the writ court would be insulted. 12. This is a case where all the legal heirs of the deceased as well as the nominees of the insurance policy are parties to the writ petition. 13. 11. If procedure and paraphernalia are permitted to come in the way of substantial justice, the equity jurisdiction of the writ court would be insulted. 12. This is a case where all the legal heirs of the deceased as well as the nominees of the insurance policy are parties to the writ petition. 13. Hence, it is a mere matter of formality that the amount is disbursed to the nominees, that is, the parents of the deceased and thereafter re-distributed among the heirs, that is, the petitioner-wife and her minor son, along with one of the nominees, the mother of the deceased. 14. Instead of relegating the petitioner-wife, with her minor son, to a fresh civil suit for the paltry amount of insurance claim, particularly in view of her plight with her son on the demise of her husband, as an exception to the general norm, the appropriate equitable course in my judicial conscience is to direct the amount to be disbursed directly to the legal heirs of the deceased instead of re-routing the same through the nominees. 15. Accordingly, WPA 18698 of 2023 is disposed of by directing the LICI, that is, the respondent no.1, to disburse the amount of the claim due on the demise of the deceased husband of the petitioner in equal shares to the three legal heirs of the said deceased, that is, the petitioner, her minor son and the private respondent no.14, the mother of the deceased. 16. It is made clear that the share of the minor son shall also be paid to the petitioner, who will receive the same on behalf of her minor son as the natural guardian of the said minor on the demise of his father. 17. Such disbursal shall be effected by the LICI within a fortnight from date by acting on the server copy of this order without insisting upon prior production of a certified copy. 18. There will be no order as to costs. Urgent photostat copies of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities.