Date of Filing : 18.04.2013 

Date of Disposal : 20.04.2021

 

BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BENGALURU 

DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF APRIL-2021

PRESENT

MR. RAVISHANKAR                                      : JUDICIAL MEMBER

MRS. SUNITA CHANNABASAPPA BAGEWADI  : MEMBER

 

 

APPEAL NO.538/2013

 

 

 

The Branch Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Bidari Complex, First Floor, S.S.Front Road, Bijapur-586101.

 

Now Rep. by The Regional Manager, The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Regional Office, Sumangala Complex, Lamington Road, Hubli-580020.

 

By Adv.Sri.H.C.Vrushabehndraiah

 

 

 

 

 

….Appellant/s

 

V/s

 

1

 

 

 

 

2

 

 

Basanagowda 

S/o Ninganagowda, Aged 45 years, Business, Kundur, Shiggov Taluq, Haveri District.

 

Manager 

V3 Lifecare India Pvt., ltd., Naswala Building, First Floor, Hosapete Road, Koppal-583231.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

…..Respondent/s

 

 

O R D E R

 

BY SRI RAVISHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER 

 

1. The appellant/Opposite party No.1 has preferred this appeal being aggrieved by the order dtd.20.03.2013 passed in CC.No.3/2013 on the file of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haveri. 

2. We shall refer to the parties as per the ranking before the District Commission.

3. The brief facts of the Complainant are that, wife of the Complainant had obtained one group insurance policy called ‘Nagrik Suraksha Group Policy’ through Opposite party No.2 and paid the premium amount of Rs.3,500/- to Opposite party No.1. Accordingly, after receipt of the premium amount, Opposite party No.1 issued the policy bearing no.472902/48/2011/3099 covering risk of accidents, injuries and death to the tune of Rs.2,40,000/- which is valid from 08.02.2011 to 07.02.2012. Such being the case, on 13.03.2012, the wife of the Complainant while going in the bullock cart accidentally fell down and suffered severe injuries to the head and subsequently succumbed to death on 14.03.2012. The Complainant being the nominee/LR of the deceased/insured submitted the claim for compensation under Nagrik Suraksha Group Policy to Opposite party No.1. After receipt of the claim, they have repudiated for the reason that, the insured had not renewed the policy as on the date of accident/death. The policy was in force from 08.02.2011 to 07.02.2012. Whereas the accident took place on 13.03.2012. Hence, they have repudiated the claim and submits no deficiency of service. 

4. After trail, the District Commission come to the conclusion that, there is deficiency of service on the part of Opposite parties and directed the Opposite party No.1 & 2 to pay an amount of Rs.2,40,000/- along with interest at 6% p.a. and also awarded Rs.10,000/- towards deficiency of service. Aggrieved by the said order the appellant before this Commission. 

5. Learned counsel for the appellant vehemently argued that as on the date of accident, they have not received any premium amount for renewal of the said group insurance policy. When the policy was not renewed, they are not liable to pay any compensation towards injuries/death of the group persons who were insured and submits that District Commission made an error in not considering non-receipt of premium of amount by Opposite party no.1 and submits to set aside the order passed by District Commission.

6. On perusal of the order passed by District Commission, memorandum of appeal, we observed that Opposite party no.2 had took the policy from the Opposite party no.1 by collecting the premium amount of Rs.3,500/- from merely 700 & 800 people under Nagrik Suraksha Group Policy and obtained the policy which is valid from 08.02.2011 to 07.02.2012. After completion of this policy period, Opposite party no.2 had received the amount of Rs.3,500/- from the Complainant on 03.02.2012 itself and this Opposite party no.2 had also issued receipt to that effect dtd.11.02.2012. When such being the case, the Complainant under impression that it was renewed. Whereas the Opposite party no.2 for the best reasons known to them they have not paid the amount to Opposite party no.1 for renewal of the policy. 

7. The Complainant should not suffer for non-payment of the premium amount from Opposite party no.2 to Opposite party no.1. Hence, Opposite party no.1 being the insurer is liable to pay the amount towards the death of the said insured. We found there is no error made by the District Commission in awarding compensation towards the death of the wife of the Complainant. The Opposite party no.1 may recover the award amount from Opposite party no.2 after paying the said amount to the Complainant. Hence, the following:

ORDER

The appeal is dismissed. The order passed by the District Commission is confirmed. 

The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to the District Commission for disbursement of the same to the Complainant.

Forward free copies to both parties. 

 

 

 

                 MEMBER                     JUDICIAL MEMBER 

 

 

 

*NG*