High Court Kerala High Court

Sheela Bhaskaran vs The Insurance Ombudsman on 31 March, 2010

Kerala High Court
Sheela Bhaskaran vs The Insurance Ombudsman on 31 March, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 11211 of 2010(B)


1. SHEELA BHASKARAN, W/O(LATE) BHASKARAN KL
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE INSURANCE OMBUDSMAN,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE GRIEVANCE CELL,

3. THE MANAGER, THE SYNDICATE BANK,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.MANOJ RAMASWAMY

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

 Dated :31/03/2010

 O R D E R
                  T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.
              ------------------------------
                  W.P.(C).NO.11211 OF 2010
              -------------------------------
                DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH, 2010


                             JUDGMENT

Petitioner is the widow of late Sri K.L. Bhaskaran,

who had availed a housing loan from the 3rd respondent-bank on

May, 2005. He had also remitted the required amount towards

insurance through M/s. Bajaj Allianz. The husband of the

petitioner expired on 11/1/2009. Thereafter, the petitioner had

contacted the 3rd respondent to get insurance claim from the

insurance company to close the loan account. Ext.P3 is the

reminder dated 3/3/2009. By Ext.P4 the petitioner was informed

by the 3rd respondent that the claim in respect of the loan

protector insurance of M/s. Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Co. Ltd.

was rejected. The petitioner has approached the lst respondent by

filing Ext.P5 complaint. Petitioner was thereafter issued Ext.P6

reply by the lst respondent informing that the petitioner will have

to file a representation before the 2nd respondent and if no reply is

-2-
W.P.(C).No.1121l/2010

received from the said respondent within one month, the

petitioner is free to approach the lst respondent. Ext.P7 is the

representation dated 12/10/2009 filed before the 2nd respondent.

It is submitted that no reply has been received so far. It is under

these circumstances that the petitioner has filed this writ petition

praying for a direction to the lst respondent to hear finally and

dispose of Ext.P5 complaint numbered as 537/09-10 with a time

frame.

2. Heard the learned standing counsel appearing for

the lst respondent.

There will be a direction to the lst respondent to take

a decision on Ext.P5 within a period of six months from the date

of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner will produce

copy of the writ petition along with copy of this judgment before

the lst respondent for compliance.

Writ Petition is disposed of as above. No costs.

T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,
JUDGE.

kcv.