Orissa

Nabarangapur

CC/220/2016

Mrs Anita Bairagi - Complainant(s)

Versus

Branch Manager, LIC of India, Nabarangpur, Odisha - Opp.Party(s)

Self

31 Dec 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, NABARANGPUR
Heading 2
 
Complaint Case No. CC/220/2016
( Date of Filing : 23 Aug 2016 )
 
1. Mrs Anita Bairagi
At/Vill- Purushattam Nagar, 41, P.V. 38, Pakhanjore, dist-Kanker, CG
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Branch Manager, LIC of India, Nabarangpur, Odisha
.
2. Divisional Manager, LIC of India, Khadasingi, Po-Berhampur, Dist of Ganjam, Odisha
.
3. Chief Manager, SBI, Umerkote, Dist- Nabarangpur
.
4. Dines Chandra Ray, At- Mohuli, UV-17, Po- Dhadra, Umerkote, Dist- Nabarangpur
.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. LAXMI NARAYAN PADHI PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MRS. MEENAKHI PADHI MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. RAMA SANKAR NAYAK MEMBER
 
PRESENT:Self, Advocate for the Complainant 1
 
Dated : 31 Dec 2016
Final Order / Judgement

       MR LAXMI NARAYAN PADHI, PRESIDENT…           The fact of case is that the complainant had opted for a Life Insurance Policy bearing No.572039239 on dt.01.07.14, in plan term 180/10/01 for premium Rs.10,000/- through the agent of OP.1 & 2. The date of maturity is 05/2017. That facing financial crunches at premature stage the complainant surrendered her policy through written persuasions for which act the OP.1 & 2 sanctioned an amount of Rs.11,893/- as surrender value through NEFT wrongly to the a/c of One Dines Chandra Ray i.e. the OP.4 instead to the account of complainant. Hence the complainant approached the OP.s to settle the matter, but though the OP.1 persuade letter to the OP.3 on dt.13.6.2016 but all her efforts became futile. Thus the complainant sustained with great mental agony and financial hardship for the deficiency and negligence of OP.s. So she prayed before this forum to pay the surrender value of her legitimate claims Rs.11,893/- and Rs.50,000/- as compensation with a Rs.5000/- as cost of this litigation.  

2.         The OP.1 & 2 though entered their appearance on dt.23.09.16, till date of this order refrained from file any counter in the case, hence set exparte, and the forum proceeded to hear the case on merit in their absence.

3.         The OP.3 entered appearance on dt.06.12.16 to file counter contending that it was the LIC while deposited the amount in some Dinesh Ray’s account was not within their scope of knowledge. But after they received the complaint, they contended the Dinesh Roy, who admittedly was earlier contacted by LIC and had refunded the alleged mis transfer. The LIC transferred Rs.11893/- to the saving A/c of complainant on dt.20.09.16.They being not connected to the whole episode, they prayed to dismiss the complaint against them. Considered.

4.         The OP entered their appearance on dt.23.9.16 to file reply to the show cause in M.A.09/16 arising out of the present complaint along with Vakalatnama/Authorization, to contend that Rs.11893/- as per interim order of the forum has been deposited into the account of the complainant on dt.17.9.16 through NEFT.

5.         Bereft of unnecessary details, it’s admitted fact that the complainant is the holder of an LIC policy under Plan 180/10/01 bearing No.572039239, with a sum of assured of Rs.15,000/-. The date of commencement of the policy was 25.5.2007 and maturity date is 05/2017. But, before maturity, the policy holder ran with financial crunch, offered the OP.1 to surrender the policy, which was accepted by OP.1 on dt.03.07.14 with calculated surrendered value of Rs.11,893/-. The OP.1 instead of paying the money to the policy holder wrongly transferred the amount to another. Despite several approaches the OP.1 never responded, hence the complainant filed this complaint to his grievance, which was admitted and on a further application and an interim order was passed directing the OP to pay the surrender value of the policy to complainant, which was complied by LIC on dt.17.09.16.

6.         In any transactions, mistakes may creep is, even the mistake is bonafide, loss and agony, if caused to the beneficiary of the transaction, he is entitled to compensation. And the mistake is more aggravated, when the authorization of LIC arrogantly and capriciously handed the grievance of the complainant. The complainant to meet his financial need, had surrendered the policy, but the OP took it, nearly two and half years to pay for it, hereby prior to the date of maturity, thus inflicting loss and enjoy on the complainant, which need be compensated. Thus we allowed the complaint against the OP.s with cost.

                                                                        ORDER

i.          The OP.1 & 2 supra are hereby directed to pay Rs.5,000/- (Five thousand) as compensation, inter alia a sum of Rs.1,000/-(One thousand) towards cost of litigation to the complainant.

iii.       All the above directions shall be complied with in 30 days of this order, failing which, the total sum will bear 12% interest per annum till its realization. Pronounced on 31st day of Dec' 2016.

           Sd/-                                      Sd/-                                           Sd/-

     MEMBER                          MEMBER                          PRESIDENT, DCDRF,

                                                                                               NABARANGPUR.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. LAXMI NARAYAN PADHI]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MRS. MEENAKHI PADHI]
MEMBER
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. RAMA SANKAR NAYAK]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.