1

IN THE COURT OF THE DISTRICT MUNSIF OF HOSUR.

O.S. No: /2017

1. Manimegalai,
2. Minor. Premkumar,
3. Minor. Preethi,
(Minor Plaintiffs rep. by their mother
and natural guardian namely the
first plaintiff) . . . . Plaintiffs

-/ Versus /-

1. Jayaraman,
2. Life Insurance Corporation of India,
Gandhi Nagar, Vellore.
3. The Post Master,
TEL Post office, Katpadi. . . . . Defendants

PLAINT FILED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF UNDER

ORDER VII RULE 1 AND SECTION 26 OF THE CIVIL
PROCEDURE CODE 1908: -

PLAINTIFFS: - 1. Manimegalai, wife of Ganesan, aged about 28 years,

housewife
2. Minor. Premkumar, son of Ganesan, aged about 7 years,
3. Minor. Preethi, daughter of Ganesan, aged about 5 years,
(Minor Plaintiffs 2 and 3 are represented by their mother and
natural guardian namely the first plaintiff Manimegalai) all are
Hindus, residing at Rajiv Gandhi Nagar, Kalpudur village and
post, Katpadi Taluk, Vellore – 7.

The address for service of the plaintiffs as stated above and that
care of their Counsel Thiru. S. Sundaresan, M.A., B.L., Advocate, Vellore.

DEFENDANTS:- 1. Jayaraman, son of Chinnayyan, aged about 50 years, Hindu,

residing at Govindappa Kottai Village, Karungali post, Via-
Madanoor, Vellore District.
2. Life Insurance Corporation of India, represented by its
Branch Manager, having branch office at No: 10, 7t h East
Main Road, Gandhi Nagar, Vellore – 6.
3. The Post Master, TEL Post Office, Katpadi 632 059.
2

3. The plaintiffs submit that the first plaintiff is the wife, the second

plaintiff is the son and the third plaintiff is the daughter of one Ganesan. The said

Ganesan was employed as unskilled worker in Tamil Nadu Industrial Explosive

Limited, Katpadi. His employment number is I.E. No: 424. He was died intestate

leaving behind the first plaintiff as his wife, the second plaintiff as his son and the

third plaintiff as his daughter in the explosive accident on 16-08-2001. The

original death certificate and legal heir ship certificate are filed herewith. That

may be read as part and parcel of the plaint.

4. The plaintiffs submit that while he was in service, he took Life

Insurance Policy under the second defendant under policy number 711331913 and

another policy number TN/53936-US dated 13-12-1991 EA/58 under the third

defendant. At the time of policy the said Ganesan nominated his brother Jayaraman

namely the first defendant as nominee. The plaintiffs alone are the first class legal

heirs to the said Ganesan as per the Hindu Succession Act. Hence the plaintiffs

alone are entitled to get entire death claim amount from the second defendant as

the legal heirs of the said Ganesan. The first defendant is not entitling any share in

the death claim amount from the second and third defendants.

5. The plaintiffs submit that the first defendant approached and

misrepresented to the second defendants to get the death claim amount. After

knowing the same, the plaintiffs issued legal notice to the second defendant on 31-

08-2001 calling upon the second defendant to send the death claim amount to

them. The same was received by the second defendant on 19-10-2001 and issued

reply on the same day to the counsel stating that they would settle the claim in
 3

favour of the nominee namely the first defendant. The 31-08-2001 dated office

copy of the lawyer’s notice, 19-10-2001 dated postal acknowledgement signed by

the second defendant and reply sent by them are filed herewith. That may be read

as part and parcel of the plaint.

6. The plaintiffs submit that, if the first defendant is allowed to receive

the entire amount from the second and third defendants, the plaintiffs are being left

with only a paper decree with no means of recovery. Hence the plaintiffs have no

other way except to seek remedy to file this suit for declaring them as legal heirs of

the said Ganesan and consequential injunction restraining the defendants 2 and 3

from disbursing the death claim amount under policy numbers 711331913 and

TN/53936-US dated 13-12-1991 EA/58 on the life of C. Ganesan to the first

defendant.

7. The cause of action for this suit arose on when the said Ganesan took

the policy from the second and third defendants and on 16-08-2001 when he was

died leaving behind the plaintiffs as his legal heirs and when the first defendant

approached the second defendant for getting the death claim of Ganesan and on 31-

08-2001 when the plaintiffs are issued legal notice to the second defendant to pay

the death claim of Ganesan to them and on 19-10-2001 when the second defendant

received the same and issued reply on the same day all are happened at Kalpudur

village, Katpadi Firka, Katpadi Taluk, Vellore District within the jurisdiction of

this Honourable Court.

8. The plaintiff values the suit for the purpose of the Court Fee and

Jurisdiction at Rs. 400-00 and paid a Court Fee of Rs. 30-50 Under Section 25(d)
4

of the Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act 1955 as per the particulars of

valuation given below: -

PARTICULARS OF VALUATION: -

The suit is one for declaration and consequential permanent injunction

against the defendants.

The Relief claimed is incapable of valuation

Hence the statutory minimum Value adopted is Rs.400.00
The court fee paid thereon under section 27© of
Tamil Nadu Court Fees Act is Rs. 30.50

9. The plaintiff therefore prays that this Honourable Court may be pleased to
pass Judgment and Decree;
(a) Declaring that the plaintiffs alone are the legal heirs of the deceased
Ganesan and consequential permanent injunction restraining the
second and third defendants from disbursing the death claim of
Ganesan under policy numbers 711331913 and TN/53936-US dated
13-12-1991 EA/58 to the first defendant,
(b) Directing the defendants to pay the cost of the suit to the plaintiffs;
and
(c) Pass any other relief or relief’s as this Honourable Court may deem fit
and proper in the circumstances of the case.
X
(On behalf herself and on
behalf of the minor plaintiffs 2
and 3)
Advocate for plaintiffs.

I, the first plaintiff herein do hereby declare that the facts stated above are
true to the best of my knowledge and belief I sign this verification on behalf of my
self and on behalf of the minor plaintiffs 2 and 3 at Vellore on 23-11-2001.
 5

X
(On behalf herself and on
behalf of the minor plaintiffs 2
and 3)

List of document filed on behalf of the plaintiffs Under Order VII Rule 14(i)
of the CPC: -
1. 30-08-1998 dated death certificate,
2. 16-08-1998 dated legal heir certificate,
List of document filed on behalf of the plaintiff Under Order VII Rule 14(ii) of
the CPC: -
1. 31-08-2001 dated office copy of the lawyer’s notice,
2. 19-10-2001 dated postal acknowledgement signed by the second defendant,
3. 19-10-2001dated reply send by the second defendant.

Advocate for plaintiffs

Verified address for service filed Under Order VI Rule 14-A of the CPC: -

PLAINTIFFS: - 1. Manimegalai, wife of Ganesan, aged about 28 years,

housewife
2. Minor. Premkumar, son of Ganesan, aged about 7 years,
3. Minor. Preethi, daughter of Ganesan, aged about 5 years,
(Minor Plaintiffs 2 and 3 are represented by their mother and
natural guardian namely the first plaintiff Manimegalai) all are
Hindus, residing at Rajiv Gandhi Nagar, Kalpudur village and
post, Katpadi Taluk, Vellore – 7.

DEFENDANTS: - 1. Jayaraman, son of Chinnayyan, aged about 50 years, Hindu,

residing at Govindappa Kottai Village, Karungali post, Via-
Madanoor, Vellore District.
2. Life Insurance Corporation of India represented by its Branch
Manager, having branch office at No: 10, 7th East Main Road,
Gandhi Nagar, Vellore – 6.
X
(On behalf herself and on
behalf of the minor plaintiffs 2
and 3)
Advocate for plaintiffs.
6

I, the first plaintiff herein do hereby declare that the facts stated above are
true to the best of my knowledge and belief I sign this verification on behalf of my
self and on behalf of the minor plaintiffs 2 and 3 at Vellore on 23-11-2001.
X
(On behalf herself and on
behalf of the minor plaintiffs 2
and 3)