1 APHC010525392016 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3481] THURSDAY ,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 2/2016 Between: The Branch Manager ...APPELLANT AND Siddam Atchamma Died and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Appellant: 1. SINGAM SRINIVASA RAO Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 2/2016 JUDGMENT:- (per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari) Heard Sri Singam Srinivasa Rao, learned counsel for the appellant appearing through virtual mode. 2. No representation for the respondents. Even on the previous date, there was no representation for the respondents. 3. The appellant is the Branch Manager of the Life Insurance Corporation of India, Giddalur, Prakasam District. 4. Respondent Nos.1 & 2 herein filed SAOP.No.3 of 2009 against respondent Nos.3 to 5 and the appellant herein (respondent No.4 in SAOP) for grant of succession certificate. The same was allowed on 11.08.2015 granting succession certificate with respect to the amount under different insurance policies in favour of petitioners therein as also in favour of respondents therein except respondent NO.4 to the extent of 2/5th share in favour of petitioner Nos.1 & 2 and 3/5th share in favour of respondent Nos.1 to 3. Challenging the said order, the present appeal has been filed. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that so far as grant of succession is concerned, he is not challenging the order/decree to that extent. 6. He however submits that direction has been given to the present appellant for the payment thereof to the persons in whose favour the 3 succession certificate has been issued, in their respective shares. He further submits that there was an order of the District Consumer Forum for payment of the amounts under the policies to the nominee. The A.P.State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, vide order dated 19.09.2008 in F.A.No.1267 of 2005 directed that the amounts be paid to the nominee. Pursuant to such order payments were made to the nominee under the policies i.e., the widow of the policy holder. Once, the payment has been made to the nominee, there would be no further liability for making the payment pursuant to the succession certificate. 7. From the order impugned it was evident that there were 10 policies and it appeared from the said order that the amounts under 9 policies were paid to the nominee. Consequently by an order dated 06.02.2025, the appellant was directed to furnish the details of all policies including the amount paid. Pursuant to the order dated 06.02.2025, affidavit has been filed by the appellant along with the memo dated 17.02.2025 and in para-3 thereof the details of all policies has been given and in para-4 it has been stated that entire amount of the said 10 policies has been paid to the nominee. 8. It is settled in law that after payment to the nominee, the liability of the insurer to pay stands discharged. It is for the legal heirs under the succession certificate to take that amount amongst themselves as per their entitlement and in case of any dispute to take recourse to such remedies as may be open under law. But, so far as the appellant is concerned, on the payment to the nominee the appellant stands discharged. 4 9. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is partly allowed to above extent. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, shall also stand closed. ___________________ RAVI NATH TILHARI,J _______________________ KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA,J Dated:20.02.2025 AG 5 68 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL NO: 2/2016 Dated:20.02.2025 AG