BEFORE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.

                                                                        Complaint Case no.115 of  2016     

                                                                      Date of Institution:          5.5.2016

                                                                         Date of Decision:     18.09.2017

Gobind son of Ram Singh, resident of village Chhani Bari Arya Smaj Mandir, Tehsil Bhadra, Distt. Hanumangarh, Rajsthan.

                                                                                  ………Complainant.

                                      Versus

1. Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Company Ltd. West Hub, Second Floor, Bajaj Finserv, Survey # 208/I-B Behind Beikfield IT Building, Viman Nagar, Nagar Road PUNE Maharashtra, PIN Code- 411014 through its authorized person.

2. Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Company Ltd. Ist, Floor, Kar house building opp. Hotel Jai Villas, Dabwali Road Sirsa, Sirsa PIN Code- 125055 Haryana through its Branch Manager.

                              ……… Opposite parties.

          Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Before:        SH. R.L.AHUJA ………………. PRESIDENT

                   SH. MOHINDER PAUL RATHEE ……MEMBER.

Present:           Sh. P.S. Sokhal, Advocate for complainant.

    Sh. Sanjay Goyal, Advocate for opposite parties.

ORDER

          In brief, case of complainant is that at the instance of agent of the opposite parties, his father Ram Singh got his life insured with the opposite parties by purchasing policy No.0290009026 for sum assured of Rs.7,21,000/- after making payment of premium to the ops. That the life assured was hale and hearty at the time of purchasing the policy and he was not having any kind of disease before and at the time of purchasing the policy from the ops. That as per terms and conditions of the policy, the life assured himself was entitled for the benefit of the policy during his life time and after his death, the nominee is entitled for benefits of the policy. It is further averred that complainant was made nominee while issuing the policy to the life insured. Unfortunately the life assured died on 25.12.2012 due to heart failure during the policy period and as per the terms and conditions of the policy, the nominee  is entitled for death claim benefit i.e. assured amount of the policy. That after the death of life assured, the complainant lodged claim with the ops and submitted death claim form alongwith original policy and all other documents and completed all the formalities. The officials of the ops assured the complainant that the claim amount will be given in a short period. The complainant made many requests to the ops for the payment of claim benefits but the officials of the ops avoided it on one pretext or the other. That now the complainant has received a letter dated 11.2.2015 issued by op no.1 vide which the op no.1 has repudiated the claim of complainant by stating the above said death claim has been declined because late Mr. Ram Singh died on 29.12.2012 and acceptance of proposal was not communicated to life assured, hence, the above contract was unconcluded as on date of death, hence the claim has been rejected as unconcluded contract, which is wrong and false version of the ops only to repudiate the genuine claim of the complainant. The contract was full and final when the insurance company received the amount of premium from the life assured. That the complainant has been harassed and humiliated by the ops by not paying the genuine claim of complainant and he has suffered mental agony at the hands of ops. Hence, this complaint.

2.                On notice, opposite parties appeared through counsel but did not file written statement despite availing several opportunities including last opportunity and as such their right in this regard was closed.

3.                The complainant produced his affidavit Ex.C1 and copy of repudiation letter dated 11.2.2015 Ex.C2.

4.                We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case file carefully.

5.                The perusal of the record reveal that complainant has filed this complaint with the specific averments that father of complainant namely Ram Singh had purchased a policy bearing No.0290009026 for a sum assured of Rs.7,21,000/- and the complainant was the nominee of his father. It is further averred that said Ram Singh died on 25.12.2012 due to heart failure during the policy period and he lodged claim with the opposite parties, but, however, ops repudiated the claim of the complainant vide letter dated 11.2.2015 on the ground that Ram Singh died on 29.12.2012 and acceptance of proposal was not communicated to life assured, hence the above contract was unconcluded as on date of death and the claim was rejected.

6.                Though, the opposite parties appeared through counsel but ops did not file any reply in order to rebut claim of the complainant.

7.                The perusal of the record further reveal that complainant in his evidence has furnished his affidavit Ex.C1 in which he has reiterated all the contents of his complaint and also placed on record Ex.C2 letter of the ops dated 11.2.2015 by which claim of the complainant was declined. The perusal of Ex.C2 reveals that this claim was declined by ops on the ground that Ram Singh died on 29.12.2012 and the acceptance of the proposal was not communicated to the assured. Further this letter finds mention that cheque bearing No.116260 dated 10.2.2015 for refund of premium amount of Rs.35,109/- was also dispatched to the complainant. The perusal of the complaint of the complainant reveals that complainant has not mentioned in the complaint the date of policy which was purchased by his father and as per averments made in the complaint, the life assured died on 25.12.2012 due to heart attack and as per letter Ex.C2, late Mr. Ram Singh died on 29.12.2012. This all reflect that there was a dispute regarding the date of death of Ram Singh. Though, it was the legal obligation of the complainant to lead his entire evidence in order to prove his claim but, however, the perusal of the evidence of the complainant reveal that complainant has not filed even death certificate in order to prove date of death of Ram Singh and further complainant has not placed on record any copy of the insurance policy showing the date of purchase of the policy in order to rebut the plea of the ops in the repudiation letter. Further more, the complaint of the complainant is silent about receiving of cheque of Rs.35,109/- which was allegedly dispatched alongwith this letter Ex.C2 to the complainant. Further, the complainant has not explained in his complaint whether he got en-cashed this cheque or not as a refund of the amount of premium. Though, the ops have taken this plea that acceptance of the contract was not conveyed to the deceased insured before the death of the deceased, so contract was not complete, the complainant had the legal right to rebut this version of the ops by leading cogent and convincing evidence but, however, the complainant has badly failed to lead any such evidence in order to rebut the plea of the ops as well as to prove his case. Rather it appears from the evidence of complainant that the complainant has not placed on record the two material documents i.e. death certificate as well as insurance policy which were necessary for the proper adjudication of the present complaint. 

8.                In view of the above, the complaint of the complainant fails and same is hereby dismissed without any order as to costs.  A copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs.  File be consigned to record room.

Announced in open Forum.                                                   President,

Dated:18.9.2017.                                                                 District Consumer Disputes

                                                                                            Redressal Forum, Sirsa.

                                                          Member