Orissa

Bargarh

CC/14/16

Puspanjali Bhue - Complainant(s)

Versus

Branch Manager , - Opp.Party(s)

Sri S.K.Pati, Advocate with otthers

15 Jul 2015

ORDER

                                                                                                                                                                                 Date of filing:- 24/07/2014

Date of Order:- 15/07/2015

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FOURM (COURT)

B A R G A R H.

Consumer Dispute Case No. 16 of 2014.

Puspanjali Bhue, wife of Late Amulya Bhue, Occupation- House wife, Caste- Sahara, Resident of Talitamparsara, P.o. Tamparsara, Ps/Tahasil- Attabira, Dist. Bargarh.

..... ..... ..... Complainant.

• V e r s u s -

State Bank of India (09031) Industrial Estate, Bareipali, represented through its Branch Manager, Bareipali, Sampalpur (Region-2), At/Po. Bareipali, Ps. Ainthapali, Dist. Sambalpur.                                                                                                  ..... ..... ..... Opposite Party.

Counsel for the Parties:-

For the Complainant :- Sri S. K. Pati, Advocate with others Advocates.

For the Opposite Party :- Sri B. K. Mahapatra, Advocate.

-: P R E S E N T :-

Miss Rajlaxmi Pattnayak ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... P r e s i d e n t.

Mrs Anjali Behera ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... M e m b e r.

Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... M e m b e r.

Dt.15/07/2015. -: J U D G E M E N T:-

Presented by Miss R. Pattnayak, President.

The factual matrix of the case of the Complainant is that, the husband of the Complainant Late Amulya Bhue who was an employee of F.C.I, Attabira had availed a housing loan of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh)only from the Opposite Party vide Account No. 01593007762 and as per the instruction of the loan sanctioning authority of the bank agreed to enrolled himself under the State Bank of India Life Super Surakhya home loan scheme to indemnify the bank towards lone coverage in case of premature death of the lonee. Accordingly, a draft amounting to Rs.1,042/-(Rupees one thousand forty two)only bearing No.1106637913 Dt.06/02/2004 and various signed papers were handed over to the Opposite Party bank for further action in relating to insured under Housing Loan Borrower Insurance Scheme. While the matter stood thus after about 3(three) years unfortunately the husband of the Complainant died on Dt.13/09/2007. On such untimely death of the husband of the Complainant, she as his legal representative approached the Opposite Party bank for her benefit amount but became astonished when she came to know that the Opposite Party bank had not sent the premium and relevant papers to State Bank of India Life insurance company ltd for insurance . The Complainant requested the Opposite Party bank for several time for her problem but in vain. Lastly she sent a Pleader's Notice to the Opposite Party bank to which the Opposite Party bank through their reply denied all the allegation of her. Being aggrieved the Complainant who is a widow lady has came up with the present complaint for a direction to the Opposite Party to pay the benefit amount of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees one lakh)only and prayed for compensation as due fit and proper by the Forum in the interest of natural justice.

 

In support of her case, the Complainant filed certain documents which are attached to the case record.

1. Copy of pleader Notice Dt.19/03/2014.

2. Copy of reply by the Opposite Party bank to the pleader Notice Dt.23/04/2014.

3. Copy of Information given by Opposite Party bank under RTI Act to Complainant along with copy of proposal form, copy of Bank Draft Dt.06/02/2004 in favour of SBI Life insurance Co. Ltd., Mumbai for Rs.1042.00/-

4. Copy of lone statement of account up to 30/09/2005.

5. Voter Identity card of Complainant.

6. Copy of Death Certificate.

Notice was duly served upon the Opposite Party. The Opposite Party has filed his version through his learned counsel and submitted that the husband of the Complainant had approached to him for finance and after due execution of documents the OP bank sanctioned an amount of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees one lakh)only on Dt.06/02/2004 to the borrower. The borrower has also given an option to cover his life and introduced the borrower with the officer of the State Bank of India Life Insurance Co Ltd. The officer of State Bank of India Life insurance Co. Ltd advised the insured to take a Super Surakhya Insurance policy to cover for the aforesaid loan of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees one lakh)only in case of death and assessed the premium of Rs.1,042/-(Rupees one thousand forty two)only for coverage of loan amount. Accordingly the borrower handed over a draft of Rs.1,042/-(Rupees one thousand forty two)only bearing No.1106637913 on Dt.06/02/2004 along with other signed documents to the Opposite Party bank for onward transmission to State Bank of India Life insurance company Ltd to insured his lone coverage. It is further submitted by the Opposite Party bank that from Dt.08/12/2003 to Dt.07/02/2004 out of 74(seventy four) numbers of borrowers who had taken Super Surakhya insurance to cover their loan 14(fourteen) numbers of borrower had only received their Premium Receipt and Policy Bond from State Bank of India Life insurance Co. Ltd. Since the State Bank of India Life insurance Co. Ltd had retained premium receipt and certificate of insurance, this bank vide its letter No. 52 Dt.24/05/2006 had requested the Branch Head of State Bank of India Life insurance Co.Ltd, Bhubaneswar to provide all the insurance papers to the insured Amulya Bhue mentioned in serial No.67 of the list. After the death of the borrower/ Amulya Bhue, claim was lodged by the Complainant as his wife with this Opposite Party bank in the year-2011. This Opposite Party bank vide letter Dt.05/07/2011 requested the State Bank of India Life Insurance Co. Ltd, Mumbai for settlement of death claim of the deceased insured. Again on Dt.15/10/2011, the O.P vide letter No. GEN/24 provided necessary information relating to premium amount, draft No., name of Nominee, Loan statement to State Bank of India Life insurance Co. Ltd, Bhubaneswar with a request to take necessary steps for settlement of death claim of deceased borrower to enable the Opposite Party for closer of the loan account of deceased borrower Amulya Bhue. This Opposite Party bank again vide letter No. BR/GEN/26/45 Dt.19/05/2014 expressed its deep anguish before Asst. General Manager, (Circle Head), State Bank of India Life insurance Co. Ltd, Bhubaneswar for non-settlement of claim of the Complainant but to the utter dismay of this Opposite Party, the State Bank of India Life Insurance Co. ltd shifting its liability by its letter Dt.05/05/2014 denied to have received any demand draft issued by this Opposite Party in favour of State Bank of India Life insurance Co.Ltd. Further submitted that the Complainant has not made State Bank of India Life insurance Co.Ltd as a party. So in the absence of proper and necessary party the case can not be adjudicated and hence this case is not maintainable against the Opposite Party. Again the present case is also barred by limitation, hence prayed that the case against Opposite Party is declared to be dismissed with cost as the Opposite Party bank has not committed any deficiency of service against the Complainant.

 

In support of his case Opposite Party has filed certain documents which are attached to the case record.

1. Attested Copy of Letter of Opposite Party bank to S.B.I. Life Dt.24/05/2006 with encloser of borrowers/insured.

2. Attested copy of Letter of Opposite Party to SBI Life insurance Bhubaneswar Dt.05/07/2011.

3. Attested copy of Letter of Request with information given by Opposite Party to SBI life Dt.15/10/2011.

4. Attested copy of Letter of Opposite Party to Asst. gen Manager SBI Life insurance Co. Ltd. Dt.19/05/2014.

5. Attested Copy of Letter of SBI Life insurance Co. Ltd to Opposite Party on Dt.05/05/2014.

 

We have heard the Parties and have carefully perused the complaint petition, written version and documents submitted by the respective Parties. Before adjudicating the dispute the main issues that arises for our consideration are:-

1. Whether the Opposite Party bank is liable for default on their part in not remitting the premium amount to State Bank of India Life insurance company Ltd although deceased/borrower was given premium to him in shape of draft for Rs.1042/- on Dt.06/02/2004 for lone coverage?

2. Whether the case is bad for non joinder of necessary party.?

3. Whether the case is barred by limitation?

4. Whether Complainant is entitled to get the claim amount of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees one lakh) from the Opposite Party and any other relief as prayed before the forum? and

5. whether the opposite party caused any deficiency in service?

 

Issue No. 1 (one) :- Whether the Opposite Party bank is liable for default on their part in not remitting the premium amount to State Bank of India Life insurance company Ltd although deceased/borrower was given premium to him in shape of draft for Rs.1042/- on Dt.06/02/2004 to insured him under lone coverage?

 

It is the admitted fact that, loan was sanctioned to borrower Amulya Bhue by the OP bank after due execution of documents for Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees one lakh)only on Dt.06/02/2004.It is also admitted fact that premium amount of Rs.1,042/-(Rupees one thousand forty two)only vide Draft No.1106637913,Dt.06/02/2014 and other singed documents were handed over to Opposite Party bank by the burrower to insured himself under the State Bank of India Life Super Surakhya Scheme for his lone coverage. So admitted facts need not be proved.

 

After death of Amulya Bhue, on Dt.13/09/2007 when his wife as his nominee lodged claim before the Opposite Party bank to give the benefit amount of her husband, it is came to her knowledge about the non remittance of premium amount and other documents to the State Bank of India Life insurance company by the O.P bank and therefore she can not get the legitimate claim of her husband. Now the issue is that whether OP bank is in fault in non-remitting the premium amount and other documents to SBI Life insurance Co. Ltd to insured the burrower under the lone coverage. Regarding this above issue Opposite Party has contended that, the bank has taken the premium amount of Rs.1,042/-(Rupees one thousand forty two)only in shape of demand a draft bearing No. 1106637913 Dt.06/02/2004 payable on State Bank of India Life insurance Co. Ltd for onwards remittance to State Bank of India Life insurance Co.Ltd Sambalpur Branch. But it is the fault of the SBI Life insurance Co .Ltd. Who has not issued the policy bond and also not settled the claim after death of the insured inspite of our several request and repudiate the claim that they have not got the premium and documents. The OP submitted further that On Dt.24/05/2006 vide letter No. 52, the bank has requested the Branch Head State Bank of India Life, Unit No.09, Bhubaneswar, to provide insurance paper to respective borrowers and in the afore said letter the name of the insured was also mentioned in serial 67(sixty seven) , but to the utter dismay of this Opposite Party, the State Bank of India Life Insurance Co.ltd has shifting its liabilities by its letter Dt.05/05/2014 denied to have received any demand draft in respect of Amulya Bhue issued by this Opposite Party bank in favour of State Bank of India Life insurance Co ltd..

 

On perusal of the record, we found that there is no cogent and convincing documentary evidence filed by the Opposite Party bank to show about the remittance of premium amount to State Bank of India Life insurance co ltd.. Copy of Letter No. 52 Dt.24/02/2006 filed by opposite party is not a sufficient letter to come to conclusion that the bank had remitted the premium to SBI life insurance co ltd. In the letter Dt.05/05/2014 issued to Opposite Party bank by the SBI Life insurance Co.Ltd it is clearly mentioned that they have not received the draft No.11006637913 Dt.06/02/2014 amounting to Rs.1,042/-(Rupees one thousand forty two)only towards premium in respect of Amulya Bhue. They had sent this letter to the opposite party bank for their information. Hence it clearly reveals from their letter that there is a fault on the part of the OP bank in not remitting the premium amount to SBI Life insurance co ltd..

 

Generally, in this type of group insurance policy, there is a privity of contract in between the State Bank of India and State Bank of India Life Insurance Co.ltd,where the borrowers /Members of Home loan from State Bank of India is offered insurance subject to the terms and conditions incorporated in the master policy and a master policy was issued in favour of State Bank of India as evidence of insurance contract. There is also an agreement between the company and the grantee i.e SBI and the grantee have agreed to furnish the statement and particulars of the members and the premium amount for grant of benefit. The premium and documents are to be collected by the bank from the burrower and to be deposited with the State Bank of India Insurance Co. Ltd for issue of policy and other documents. Similarly in the instant case also since the Opposite Party bank has not deposited the documents and premium to the State Bank of India Life Insurance co ltd inspite of receipt of premium amount , the said company has not issued the policy. In this case the Opposite Party has concealed that document i.e. copy of agreement/ memorandum of understanding showing the agreement between State Bank of India and State Bank of India Life Insurance company ltd. By showing series of documents the OP bank can not conceal their fault and can not shifted its responsibility to others. So the forum views that the opposite party bank is in fault in non remitting the premium amount and this issue is answered accordingly.

 

Issue No.2(two):- Whether the case is bad for non joinder of necessary party.?

Regarding this issue the opposite party has submitted that the Complainant has not made SBI LIFE INSURANCE CO.LTD as party in this case. So the case should be dismissed for non joinder of necessary party. To this issue forum views that how a illiterate widow lady could know that the State Bank of India has tied up or has an agreement with the State Bank of India Life Insurance co ltd.?. So to conceal its own fault the opposite party bank has taken shelter of this plea that the Complainant has not arrayed to the State Bank of India Life Insurance as a party in this case which the forum views that it should not be a cause for rejection of a genuine claim when the Opposite Party has admitted that he has received the premium and other documents to enroll Amulya Bhue under State Bank of India Life Insurance Policy and the SBI Life insurance Co.Ltd denied to have any receipt of premium from the Opposite Party. This technical plea should not play a vital role in rejection of the claim. The interest of justice shall be defeated by this rule of technicality if it would not be considered Properly. So This issue is answered accordingly.

 

Issue No. 3(three):- Whether the case is barred by limitation?

Regarding this issue that the case is barred by limitation has already been decided by this forum in its earlier order Dt.19/08/2014 and the forum condone the delay and admit the case as the complainant has filed a delay condonation petition U/S-24A read with Section-5 of the Indian Limitation Act, duly showrn in Affidavit and has shown sufficient cause for not filling of the case in time.

 

Issue No.4(four) and No. 5(five):-Whether Complainant is entitled to get the claim amount of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees one lakh)only from the Opposite Party and any other relief as prayed before the forum? and caused deficiency in service ?

 

Regarding this issue the forum perused the record and found that the opposite party has sanctioned Rs 1,00,000/-(Rupees one lakh)only to the borrower. The lone statement of account filed by the complainant up to the year 2005 shown that the outstanding lone was Rs 90,745.31/-(Rupees ninety thousand seven hundred forty five and thirty one paise). Opposite Party has not filed any lone statement account to show what amount of loan is outstanding against the burrower. So in the absence of up to date loan account statement the forum order to adjust the outstanding loan amount pending againt in the name of the Amulya Bhue.

 

Rejection of the claim of the Complainant is considered to be in genuine and improper which amounts to deficiency in service and the OP bank is liable for default in amount of the OP bank in our view the Complainant is entitled to get her benefit etc. Further we hereby also cautioned the Opposite Party bank not to commit such type of mistakes in futures .

 

• O R D E R -

1. The Opposite Party is directed to adjust the out standing loan amount pending in the name of deceased Amulya Bhue and close the lone account.

2. Further the opposite party is directed to issue no dues certificate in respect of this loan account.

 

Complaint is allowed and disposed off accordingly.

Typed to my dictation

and corrected by me.

 

 

 (Miss Rajlaxmi Pattnayak)

        P r e s i d e n t.

                                                                                           I agree,                                                                  I agree,

                                                                            (Sri Pradeep Kumar Dash)                                        ( Smt. Anjali Behera)

                                                                                       M e m b e r.                                                             M e m b e r.