IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.

                     CASE No.  CC/126/2017

 Date of Filing:                                       Date of Admission:                   Date of Disposal:

   04.08.2017                                            16.08.2017                                      05.10.2023  

Complainant:   1) Minor Md. Kauswar Ali

S/o- Late Jamarul Haque

2) Minor Julekha Khatun

D/o- Late Jamarul Haque ,

Both are represented by the guardian grandfather Umar Ali,

S/o- Najemuddin Sk of Village Majhira,

P.O.- Gobindapur, P.S.- Berhampore,

Dist- Murshidabad,

Pin-742405

                                                                -Vs-

Opposite Party:  The Branch Manager,

                            L.I.C.I. Berhampore Branch,

                            P.O. & P.S.- Berhampore,

                            Dist- Murshidabad, Pin-742101                 

Agent/Advocate for the Complainants                       :           Sambarta Mukherjee

Agent/Advocate for the O.P.                                       :            S. Saha

           Present:   Sri Ajay Kumar Das…………………………..........President.     

                             Smt. Aloka Bandyopadhyay……………………..Member.

  Sri. Nityananda Roy…………………………………….Member.

FINAL ORDER

   SMT. ALOKA BANDYOPADHYAY,  member.

   This is a complaint under section 12 of the CP Act, 1986.

One Minor Md. Kauswar Ali and Anr. (here in after referred to as the Complainants) filed the case against The Branch Manager  (here in after referred to as the O.P.) praying for compensation alleging deficiency in service.

 The sum and substance of the complaint case is as follows:-

One Najminia Bibi @ Niajmina Bibi before her death made a L.I.C.I Policy named Jiban Saral bearing No. 429146222 sum assured Rs. 1,25,000/- the said Najmina Bibi and her husband Jamarul Hoque both died on the road accident on 27.07.2011 leaving behind their minor son Md. Kausal Ali and minor daughter Julekha Khatun. The instant case has been filed by both the minor represented by the grandfather Umar Ali. After the death of the Najmina Bibi and Jamarul Hoque the Complainants went to the office of the O.P. to collect the amount against the aforesaid L.I.C.I policy. The O.P. stated that without production of succession certificate the same cannot be disbursed in favour of the Complainants, so as per advice of the O.P. the Complainant filed a Misc Case bearing no. 54/2014 before the Civil Judge Senior Division,  Berhampore Court  for getting succession certificate and the same was issued in favour of the Complainants. On production of the succession certificate the O.P. vide a Letter dated 22.06.2017 refused to pay the amount in favour of the Complainant on the ground that the claims of the Complainants is barred by limitation as the claimants failed to claim within 3 years from the date of risk under the policy. Finding no other alternative the Complainant filed the instant case before this Commission for appropriate relief with a direction to the O.P. to pay a sum of Rs. 1,25,000/- along with interest and Rs. 50,000/- for cost of litigation and Rs. 25,000/- for mental pain and agony.

Defence Case

After due service of the notice the O.P. appeared by filing W/V contending inter alia that the case is not maintainable as the claim was initiated after 6 years from the date of death and was not lodged within 3 years from the date of death by submitting necessary proof of death of life assured. So the case is liable to be dismissed with cost.

Points for decision

1. Are the Complainants a consumer under the provision of the CP Act, 1986?

2. Has the OP any deficiency in service, as alleged?

3. Are the Complainants entitled to get any relief, as prayed for?

Decision with Reasons:

Point no.1, 2 & 3

 All the points are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity of discussion.

 Admittedly, Najmina Bibi was the policy holder named Jiban Saral bearing No. 429146222 under the Life Insurance Corporation of India for which accident benefit sum assured was Rs. 1,25,000/-. At the time of the death of said Najmina Bibi the policy was active. The nominee in the said policy was Jamarul Haque but on 27.07.2011 both the policy holder were died on 27.07.2011 for road accident leaving behind their son Md. Kauswar Ali and only daughter Julekha Khatun as their legal heirs. After the death of the said persons the Complainants being the legal heirs went to the office of the O.P. to collect the amount against the aforesaid L.I.C.I policy and it was informed by the O.P. that without production of the succession certificate they would not disburse the said amount in favour of the Complainants.  To get the succession certificate the Complainants filed a Misc Case bearing No. 15/2014 before the Civil Judge Senior Division at Berhampore on 30.06.2014 and the Ld. Court issued the same on 20.03.2017. After getting the succession certificate the Complainants produced the same before the O.P. but the O.P. rejected the same stating that the claim of the Complainants are barred by limitation.

The O.P. in the W/V stated that for the first time on 20.06.2017 that they received one death intimation from Ummar Ali, intimating the death of Najmina Bibi on 30.04.2011 due to fire caught in mosquito net along with his husband. But this Complainants submitted the reason of death was road accident. As the death claim arose within 2 months from the date of commencement of the policy the claims falls under early claim category as the claim was not lodged within 3 years from the date of death by submitting necessary proof of life assured so the claim was rightly rejected.

It is the fact that the Complainants filed the Succession Certificates after 6 years of the death of the policy holder. The O.P. in the evidence on affidavit stated that the Policy No. 429146222 was issued in the name of Najmina Bibi who died on 29.04.2017 at district hospital Berhampore but as per submission of this complainants date of death was 27.07.2017. The nominee of the said policy died on 02.05.2011 i.e., much before the death of the policy holder.

It appears from the case record that Complainants are absent since long. Moreover, they have not filed the death certificate of the policy holder to ascertain the date of death and the Complainants are absent since long. The O.P. stated that as per rule the claims should be lodged within 3 years from the date of death by submitting necessary proofs of death of life assured and other requirements for death claim.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case we are of the view that want of proper documents and absence of the Complainants since long this Commission is declined to pass any order.

Reasons for delay

The Case was filed on 04.08.2017 and admitted on 16.08.2017. This Commission tried its level best to dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible in terms of the provision under section 13(3A) of the CP Act, 1986. Delay in disposal of the case has also been explained in the day to day orders.

In the result, the Consumer case fails.     

 Fees paid are correct. Hence, it is                                                            

Ordered

that the complaint Case No. CC/126/2017 be and the same is dismissed on contest against the O.P. but under the circumstances without any order as to costs.  

Let plain copy of this order be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties / Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand /by post under proper acknowledgment  as per rules, for information and necessary action.

The Final Order will also be available in the following Website:

    confonet.nic.in

Dictated & corrected by me.

            Member

               Member                                           Member                                                         President.