DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: BHADRAK : (ODISHA).

Consumer Complaint No. 66 of 2022.

                                                                  Date of hearing  :   30.12.2023  

                                                                     Date of order         : 30.04.2024. 

Dated the 30^th day of April 2024.

1.     Kabitarani Prusty,

        W/o Late Surendra Kumar Prusty &

       (daughter of Umakanta Sahu).

2.     Siba Prusty, minor represented by mother               

        Guardian Kabita Prusty (Complainant No. 1)

         Both are of Vill/Po- Paliabindha, Ps- Tihidi, Dist- Bhadrak

         At present C/o UmakantaSahu, Vill- Begunia, Po- Kanchapada,

          Ps-Simulia, Dist- Balasore.

                                                                                                                                  . .  .  .  . Complainant.

Vrs.

1. Branch Manager, L.I.C of India,

          At- Bonth Chhack, Po- Bhadrak,

          Ps- Bhadrak (T), Dist- Bhadark, Pin- 756100.

2. Branch Manager, Odisha Gramya Bank,

          Paliabindha Branch,

          At/Po- Paliabindha, Ps- Tihidi, Dist- Bhadark.

3. Kunjalata Prusty, W/o Gangadhar Prusty,

          Vill/Po- Paliabindha, Ps- Tihidi, Dist- Bhadark.

                                                                                                                          ….................Opposite parties

P R E S E N T S

          1.  Sri Shiba Prasad Mohanty, President,

          2.  Smt. Madhusmita Swain, Member.

                   Counsels appeared for the parties.

Counsel for Complainant :-Sri S.K. Nayak, Advocate & Associate,

Counsel for O.P.No.1        :-Sri D.N. Panda, Advocate,

Counsel for O.P.No.2       :- In person.

Counsel for O.P. No.3      :  Sri B.K. Mohanty, Advocate & Associates.

                   J U D G M E N T.

SRI SHIBA PRASAD MOHANTY, PRESIDENT.

          In the matter of an application filed by the complainant alleging deficiency of service against the Opposite Parties under Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

Fact of the case is that, the deceased complainant namely Surendra Kumar Prusty was a businessman & maintaining his family & earning his livelihood through business. The complainant obtained three nos. of L.I.C. Policies from the O.P.No.1. Those policies are given as below:-

The said Surendra Kumar Prusty also obtained three Nos. of policies from the O.P.No.2 as below :-

The husband of Complainant No.1 was paying premium regularly of LIC Policies & O.P.No.2 also deducted premiums regularly with respect to PMSBY & PMJBY & APY Policies from the account of Surendra Kumar Prusty. During the continuance of the above mentioned 6 Nos. of policies the husband of Comp.1 expired in a road accident on 26.03.2022. The marriage of the Complt.1 was held with Surendra Kumar Prusty on 01.07.2020 & the policy holder died on 26.03.2022 while the Complt.2 is in the lap of Complt.1.The Complt.1 & 2 being the wife & son of the deceased policy holder & beneficiaries under the above policies lodged claim before O.P.1 & 2 to get benefits accrued under the above policies. Complt.1 filed the relevant documents before O.P.1 & 2 along with the legal heir certificate of deceased Surendra Kumar Prusty issued by Revenue Officer vide Misc. Certificate Case No.E/LHC/2022/74724 dated 11.05.2022 wherein the Complainants & mother of deceased policy holder, namely Kunjalata Prusty are legal heirs. As per law the Complt.1 & 2 are entitled to get 2/3^rd share & O.P.3 is entitled to get 1/3^rd share out of the amount accrued under the above mentioned policies. After the death of deceased policy holder - Surendra Kumar Prusty, the Complt.1 & 2 are being tortured & humiliated by the in-law’s members including O.P.3. Even on 27.02.2022, the father-in-law, the O.P.3 the elder brother of deceased & his wife tried to kill Complt.1 by pressing her face by a pillow. Hearing the groaning sound of her the villagers reached for which her life was saved. The in-law’s members used obscene languages saying - “ଲକ୍ଷ୍ମୀ ଛାଡି, ଘଇତାକୁ ଖାଇଲୁ” etc. Now out of fear& apprehending danger to her life the Complt.1 along with Complt.2 are staying in his father’s house. As because the O.P.3 has been appointed as Nominee, in five nos. of policies by the deceased policy holder (excluding LIC Policy No.858914186), she along with the in-law family members of the Complt.1 are trying to grab the entire money accrued under the policies. The position of a nominee in an insurance policy is mere a custodian & the nominee is to transfer or distribute it to the legal heirs of deceased as per their entitlement. Due to inhuman behavior of the in-law’s family members towards Complt.1, the relationship of complainant with O.P.3 is deteriorating day by day. The Complt.1 is apprehending in every moment that the O.P.3 will misappropriate the entire amount accrued under the policies of her deceased husband by depriving the complainants from their 2/3^rd share. If the O.P.1 & 2 will disburse the entire amount accrued under the polices of Late Surendra Kumar Prusty in favour of O.P.3, then the complainants will be deprived of getting their legitimate share i.e. 2/3^rd share. The assured amount in the above mentioned 6 Nos. of policies is about Rs.10,000,00/- out of which the complainants are entitled to get 2/3^rd share. The complainant prayed to direct the O.P.1 & 2 to disburse 2/3^rd of the amount accrued under the above 6 Nos. of policies in favour of the complainant’s & to disburse 1/3^rd share in favour of O.P.3 after proper calculation. The complainants have filed the xerox copies of documents i.e. 1) Copy of Aadhaar No.8039 7290 0448 of Surendra Kumar Prusty, 2) Details of LIC Policy No.596994946, 3) LIC Policy No.559318195, 4)LIC Policy No.858914186, 5) Birth Certificate of Complt.2, 6) Legal Heir Certificate of deceased- Surendra Kumar Prusty, 7) Passbook of Gramya Bank of Purusottampur Branch of Complt.1, 8) Voter ID of deceased – Surendra Kumar Prusty, 9)Aadhaar Card of Complt.1 bearing No.8386 5728 6649, 10)Voter ID Card of Complt.1-Kabitarani Prusty, 11) Death of Certificate of Surendra Kumar Prusty issued by CHC, Soro & 12) Anganwadi Registration Certificate of Complt.2.

The O.P.No.1 submits that, the deceased policy holder had availed 3 Nos. of LIC Policies as stated in complaint petition. So far the Policies No. 559318195 & 596994946 the O.P. assures to pay the legitimate dues as per the calculation as applicable in all policies of the same category. But in case of Policy No.858914186 is concerned Rs.10,000/- will be paid every year till maturity and the sum assured plus bonus after maturity as per terms & conditions of specified policy category. The O.P. Corporation is the trusted corporation of crores of people. As a trusty it always safe guards the public money and cannot divert its calculation or show excess favour to anybody in any case. This O.P. once again assures to pay the legitimate dues as per their calculation & terms and conditions of the policies not as per calculation of complaints.

The O.P.No.2 submits that, all three schemes are of Govt. of India made through Bank and guided by Insurance Company & RBI Guidelines, keeping of Nominee is mandatory at the time of opening of Insurance Policy. In case of untimely death of any policy holder, we use to submit the details of the policy holder like cause of death, death certificate, post-mortem report, name of nominee etc. to the Insurance Company. Then the Insurance Company settled the claim as per the details given by us.

The O.P.No.3 denies the averments of the complainant and submits that, the deceased son of O.P.3 Surendra Kumar Prusty had taken five numbers of policies under LIC & Odisha Gramya Bank Paliabindha Branch. The nominee of the policies was his mother the O.P.3 till the death of Surendra Kumar Prusty. O.P.3 was contained as nominee. The policy holder late Surendra Kumar Prusty got married on 01.07.2020 till his accidental death on 26.03.2022 the  deceased policy holder Surendra Kumar Prusty did not change the name in the stated policy. He kept the nominee as to his mother as O.P.3, in his policies, it was the intention of deceased after his accidental death. The deceased had ample opportunity to change the nominee in his life time after his marriage, on 01.07.2020 & made complainant as nominee. It was his wife if any incidental/accidental death comes his mother will get the benefit of the policy be as alone O.P.3 for which the deceased Surendra Kumar Prusty categorically written the death benefit will go to the nominee as he stated in the policy bond. In the two years span the deceased Surendra Kumar Prusty had taken one more policy in where he made nominee as his wife as Complt.1 did not keep the O.P.3 as his nominee. There the deceased policy holder never tried to change the nominee in his life time. It was his wish that the mother of deceased be kept as nominee & the nominee will get the death benefit on the death of the policy holder. It was cherished wish of policy holder. The insured did not carve out the proportionate amount as 100% benefit will go to the nominee as the then policy bond does not contain the specifically but present policy contain the same carve out deceased policy holder nominates the person mentioned in the nominee column to whom to the exclusion of all other person in the event of the death of policy holder the amount standing credit in the account of deceased  policy holder sum assured along with death benefit would be payable to the nominee. The deceased has been conferred the beneficial interest of 100% in favour of nominee. So there is no agitation from complainant in order to obtain the 2/3^rd share from the demarcated beneficiary interest. It is out & out contrary to the settled principles of policy condition. The policy of LIC No.596994946, No.559318195 in where the deceased categorically mentioned as his nominee to his mother & the policy No.500158431950 Atal Pension Yojana, PMSBY, PMSBY No.OGB 4152 SBY 549995 PMSBY No.OGB 4152 JBY201812, besides the above two policy the last three also, the deceased Surendra Kumar Prusty nominate to his mother. Therefore the policy benefit will go to the nominee of policy holder in case of accidental death & the intention of policy holder is that the nominee will act, in case of death of policy holder by the way of nomination the insured extended the total liberty to the nominee.

It is the well settled principle of law that Nominee is only the custodian of the benefits till the same is paid to the rightful claimants. The legal heir certificate very clearly shows that these complainants and the OP No.3, the mother are the legal heirs of the deceased Surendra Kumar Prusty. So, the benefit of the policy needs to be equally apportioned among the three legal heir share-holders. 

O R D E R.

In the result, the complaint be & same is allowed. OP No.1 & 2 are directed to disburse 2/3rd share from the amount accrued against the policies in favour of the complainant and 1/3^rd in favour of OP No.3 within 45 days from date of pronouncement of this order after calculating interest over those policies and observing all official formalities. The earlier order dtd.12/08/2022 stands infructuous in view of final disposal of this case. No order of cost against any party.

This order is pronounced in the Open Court on this the 30^th day of April 2024 under my hand and seal of the Commission.