THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.G.SHANKAR W.P.No.8959 of 2008 ORDER (per Sri K.G.Shankar, J) The petitioner is a widow. Her husband took an insurance policy with the Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC). The policy carries a condition that if the person whose life is insured dies, twice the sum assured should be paid. The husband of the petitioner, whose life was insured, died on 11.03.2002. Consequent upon the death of her husband, the petitioner moved the LIC for payment of the amount. The LIC declined to pay the amount as agreed upon, on the ground that there are violations of the conditions of the policy. 2. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner moved C.D.No.13 of 2003 before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Krishna, Machilipatnam (for short ‘the District Forum’). Through order dated 29.11.2004, the District Forum allowed the application of the petitioner and directed respondent Nos.1 and 2 to pay the policy amount at Rs.1,00,000/-together with interest at 9% per annum from the date of the complaint and costs of Rs.500/-. The third respondent-APSRTC was also directed to pay compensation at Rs.5,000/- towards damages. Aggrieved by the orders of the District Forum, the Depot Manager, APSRTC, preferred F.A.No.733 of 2005. The LIC of India, in its turn, preferred F.A.No.239 of 2005 before the Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Hyderabad (for short ‘the State Commission’). The State Commission while dismissing F.A.No.733 of 2005 on 14.06.2005, passed orders dated 18.12.2007 in F.A.No.239 of 2005 reducing the sum assured payable to the petitioner from Rs.1,00,000/- to Rs.50,000/-. 3. Questioning the same, the petitioner preferred F.A.I.A.No.97 of 2008 seeking for review of the orders of the State Commission in F.A.No.239 of 2005. Through the impugned orders, the State Commission dismissed the review petition. Hence, the present writ petition. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner drew our attention to the conditions of Jeevan Mitra Policy. The policy Table 88 envisages that in the event of the death of the policyholder, twice the sum assured plus bonus is payable to the nominee of the policy. 5. Admittedly, the husband of the petitioner died of natural death, in the sense, he died suffering from Cancer. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that in view of the death of the husband, the petitioner is entitled to receive twice the sum assured plus bonus thereof. His contention is that the order passed in C.D.No.13 of 2003 by the District Forum was just and proper and reversal of the same reducing the amount payable through F.A.No.239 of 2005 is unjust and improper. 6. In view of the terms and conditions of the policy as incorporated in Table 88 of the policy conditions, we agree with the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that when her husband died, the petitioner would be entitled to twice the sum assured plus bonus thereof. Admittedly, the sum assured in the present case is Rs.50,000/-. The petitioner consequently is entitled to Rs.1,00,000/- apart from the bonus. 7. The learned counsel for the LIC has informed that the amount covered by the bonus has already been paid to the petitioner apart from Rs.50,000/- ordered through F.A.No.239 of 2005. We agree with the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the order in FA No.239 of 2005 suffers from infirmity, as it did not take notice of the terms and conditions of the policy. The order passed in C.D.No.13 of 2003 by the District Forum consequently stands restored. The order passed in F.A.No.239 of 2005 stands set aside. The petitioner is, accordingly, entitled to twice the sum assured plus bonus in all. 8. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. The petitioner is not entitled to interest till today. The LIC shall pay the balance amount due to the petitioner within one month from today. If the LIC does not pay the same within one month, the balance amount due to the petitioner shall carry interest at 9% per annum from today only. No costs. ______________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J _______________ K.G.SHANKAR, J Date:07.04.2011 sj