BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM: KURNOOL
Present: Sri. T.Sundara Ramaiah, B.Com B.L., President
And
Sri. M.Krishna Reddy, M.Sc., M.Phil., Male Member
And
Smt. S.Nazeerunnisa, B.A., B.L., Lady Member
Wednesday the 30th day of November, 2011
C.C.No.55/2011
Between:
S.Alla Bakash, S/o Khasim Sahib,
R/o Kalva Village, Orvakal Mandal, Kurnool District - 518 010.
…Complainant
-Vs-
- L.I.C. of India, Represented by its Branch Manager,
Kurnool, D.NO.40/36, River View Colony, Kurnool-518 004.
- LIC of India, Represented by its Divisional Manager,
Kadapa, D.No.1/55, (Post Box No.10), Jeevan Prakash, College Road, Kadapa-516 001.
...Opposite ParTies
This complaint is coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri M.L.Srinivasa Reddy, Advocate for complainant and Sri I.Anantha Rama Sastry, Advocate for opposite parties 1 and 2 and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following.
ORDER
(As per Sri. T.Sundara Ramaiah, President)
C.C. No.55/2011
1. This complaint is filed under section 12 of C. P. Act, 1986 praying:-
- To direct the opposite parties to pay the assured amount of Rs.1,00,000/- with all benefits and interest at 12% per annum from the date of death of the insured;
- To award compensation of Rs.20,000/- for causing mental agony and inconvenience suffered by the complainant at the deficient conduct of the opposite parties;
- To pay cost of Rs.10,000/-;
- To pass such other reliefs as the Honourable Forum may deem fit and proper in the circumstance of the case.
2. The case of the complainant in brief is as under:- The complainant son by name Late Shaik Rasheed @ Razhith took insurance Policy bearing No.655740661 from opposite party No.1 commencing from 23-07-2009 for the assured amount of Rs.1,00,000/-. The complainant is the nominee under the policy. The insured died in a train accident on 27-01-2010 at Hossur Railway Station, Dharmapuri in Tamil Nadu State. After the death of the insured the complainant who is the father submitted the claim along with necessary documents to opposite party No.1. Even after lapse of more than sufficient time, the opposite parties neither settled nor repudiated the claim of the complainant. Hence the complaint.
3. Opposite party No.2 filed written version and the same is adopted by opposite party No.1. It is stated in the written version of opposite party No.2 that the complaint is not maintainable. The deceased took insurance policy bearing No.655740661 from opposite party No.1 for an assured amount of Rs.1,00,000/-. The premium amount is Rs.6,329/- per year. The policy commenced on 23-07-2009. The complainant is the nominee under the policy. The complainant has not submitted the relevant documents to opposite party No.2 to settle the claim. The investigation revealed that the assured died due to run over by the train. It is mentioned in the F.I.R., that a male body was laying on the railway track. The name and the address of the deceased are not known. As per the post mortem certificate the person died due to shock and hemorrhage for injuries to vital organs and ribs fracture. The cause of the death is no known. The death might be due to suicide. Inspite of the demand made by the opposite parties the complainant not submitted the relevant documents. There is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties and the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
4. On behalf of the complainant Ex.A1 to A9 are marked and sworn affidavit of the complainant is filed. On behalf of the opposite parties Ex.B1 to B5 are marked and sworn affidavit of the opposite party No.2 is filed.
5. Both sides filed written arguments.
6. The points that arise for consideration are:
- Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of Opposite Parties?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for?
- To what relief?
7. POINTS 1 and 2:- Admittedly the complainant son by name Late Shaik Rasheed @ Razhith obtained insurance policy bearing No. 655740661 from opposite party No.1. The sum assured under policy is Rs.1,00,000/-. Yearly premium payable under the policy is Rs.6,329/-. The policy commenced on 23-07-2009 and the complainant is the nominee under the said policy. It is the case of the complainant that his son who is the insured died in the train accident on 27-01-2010 at Hossur Railway Station, Dharmapuri in Tamil Nadu State. The complainant to show that his son died on 27-01-2010 relied on Ex.A1 to Ex.A3 and Ex.A7. Ex.A1 is the copy of the F.I.R. in Crime No.27/2010 of Dharmapuri Railway Police Station. In Ex.A1 name of the deceased is not clearly mentioned. Ex.A3 is the post mortem certificate of the deceased where in it is mentioned that Shaik Rasheed, aged 24 years, died due to shock and hemorrhage for injuries to vital organs and ribs fracture. Ex.A7 is the death certificate of the Shaik Rasheed issued by Registrar of Births and Deaths, Municipal Office, Hossur. In Ex.A7 it is clearly mentioned that Shaik Rasheed died on 27-01-2010 at Hossur Railway Station. The death of the Shaik Rasheed is not under dispute.
8. The complainant who is the nominee filed this present complaint claiming benefits under the policy stating that his son died accidentally in train accident. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties that the cause of the death of the deceased is not clear and that they are not liable to pay any amount to the complainant. Admittedly the insurer is not liable to pay any amount to the nominee under the policy if the death of the insured is due to suicide. There is no mention in Ex.A3 Post Mortem Certificate that the deceased committed suicide. Ex.A4 is the Railway Ticket. It was purchased to travel from Hossur to Bangalore. The opposite parties did not place any evidence to show that the deceased died by committing suicide. There is no material on record to show that the opposite parties appointed investigator or surveyor to know the cause of the death of the deceased. It is simply mentioned in the written version that the investigation revealed that the deceased died due to run over by the train. The deceased might have fallen from the running train and died. In the absence of the clear evidence that the deceased committed suicide the claim of the complainant cannot be rejected. Admittedly the complainant submitted his claim and the same was not settled by the opposite parties. No doubt the opposite parties demanded the complainant to submit the copies of the F.I.R. and Post Mortem Report etc. It is not known whether the complainant submitted the same to the opposite parties. During the enquiry the complainant filed all the required documents. They go to show that the deceased died in a train accident. There is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties. The complainant who is the nominee under the policy is entitled to the assured amount of Rs.1,00,000/- along with benefits.
9. In the result, the complaint is partly allowed directing the opposite parties jointly and severally to pay assured amount of Rs.1,00,000/- to the complainant along with cost of Rs.500/- within one month from the date of the order.
Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open bench on this the 30th day of November, 2011.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MALE MEMBER PRESIDENT LADY MEMBER
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant : Nil For the opposite parties : Nill
List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-
Ex.A1 Photo copy of F.I.R. in Crime No.27/2010 of P.S.
Dharmapuri Railway Police station dated 27-01-2010.
Ex.A2. Photo copy of Inquest report (which in Tamil)
dated 27-01-2010.
Ex.A3 Photo copy of Post Mortem Certificate of the deceased
issued by R.P. Dharmapuri dated 28-01-2010.
Ex.A4 Photo copy of Railway Ticket No.A66738808 for
Rs.24/- dated 27-01-2010.
Ex.A5 Photo copy of Final Report (which in Tamil) in Crime
No.27/2010 of Dharmapuri P.S. dated 23-02-2010.
Ex.A6 Final Report Translation from Tamil to English (Ex.A5).
Ex.A7 Photo copy of Death Certificate issued by Registrar of
Births and Death Municipal Office Hosur Taluk,
Krishnagiri District, Tamil Nadu State
dated 19-04-2010.
Ex.A8 Photo copy of Form No – II OA No.309/2010 on the
file of the Hon’ble Railway claim Tribunal
Secunderabad Branch.
Ex.A9 Photo copy of Policy bearing No.655740661
dated 23-07-2009.
List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties:-
Ex.B1 Photo copy of letter by opposite party No.2 to
complainant dated 29-08-2011.
Ex.B2 Office copy of letter by opposite party No.1 to
complainant dated 20-02-2011.
Ex.B3 Office copy of letter by opposite party No.1 to
complainant dated 13-01-2011.
Ex.B4 Office copy of letter by opposite party No.1 to
complainant dated 13-12-2010.
Ex.B5 Photo copy of letter by opposite party No.2 to
opposite party No.1 dated 10-12-2010.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MALE MEMBER PRESIDENT LADY MEMBER
// Certified free copy communicated under Rule 4 (10) of the A.P.S.C.D.R.C. Rules, 1987//
Copy to:-
Complainant and Opposite parties :
Copy was made ready on :
Copy was dispatched on :
