SRI BIJOY KUMAR DAS,PRESIDENT:-
Deficiency in service in respect of non-disbursement of matured amount on the Life Insurance Policy under Salary Saving Scheme are the allegations arrayed against OP.
2. Complaint in a nutshell reveals that, Complainant being a State Govt. employee obtained a Life Insurance Policy from dt. 20/01/1990 from Op-1 and deducting Rs. 60/- per month from his salary, the Policy no. is 582632213(SSS). It reveals that on transfer of Complainant-Policy holder from Bhawanipatna to Cuttack, Complainant requested Branch Manager, LIC of India, Bhawanipatna Branch(Op-1) to transfer the said Policy to Cuttack and accordingly the monthly premium was deducted and deposited in the branch of Op-2. The Policy was matured in the month of January-2015.It is also revealed from the Complaint petition that on the occurrance of super cyclone in the year 1999,the dewlling house of the complainant was destroyed along with related documents, but complainant as per the provisions filed required documents with an affidavit before Op-2 for release of the matured amount. When Complainant- Policy holder did not received the maturity amount, issued an Advocate’s Notice to Op-1 &2 by Regd. Post, Op-1 responded the letter and in his reply Op-1 states some imaginary facts and Op-2 remained silent on the receipt of Advocate’s Notice. It is further revealed from the Complaint-petition that Complainant has not availed any loan against the said-policy and preys this Forum to get back the matured amount against the Policy No. 582632213(SSS) along with accrued interest and cost of litigation.
3. Being Noticed Op- Life Insurance Corporation appeared through their Ld. Counsel Mr. R.K.Samal and filed written statement into the dispute, Op-1, Branch Manager, Bhawanipatna on filing a memo on dt. 22/8/2017 intimated this Forum to consider the written statement of Op-2, Sr. Division Manager, LIC,Cuttack, as the version of Op-1.Ops in their written statement challenged the maintainability of the Complainant, which is formal in nature and deny the allegations of the Complainant. Op-Corp. submitting the facts of the dispute averred that Complainant obtained a Life Insurance Policy on Salary Savings Scheme, bearing Policy No. 582632213 commenced from dt. 20/01/1990 with monthly premium of Rs. 60/- and the monthly premium were deposited in the LIC, Bhawanipatna Branch upto December-2001 by the Employer of the Complainant. It is also averred that LIC, Bhawanipatna Branch had neither received any premium with effect from January-2002 nor any communication has been made by the Complainant-Policy holder to transfer the Policy to any branch of Cuttack. Op-1 has not received any affidavit or document from the complainant except the Notice dt. 4/5/2015, which was replied on dt. 16/06/2015. It is further case of the Op-Corp. that Complainant was requested by Op-1 letter dtd. 16/6/2015 to contact, LIC of India OGSSS unit Cuttack for payment of the claim. It is also averred that Complainant has avail a loan of Rs. 2100/- against the said Policy on dt. 2/8/1996 from branch of Op-1 and the Policy holder has not paid the principal of interest till-date. It is further averred that the OGSSS unit LIC of India, Cuttack Divisional Office has received the premium under the Policy from 8/2013 to 12/2014 and there is no record available in the Office of Ops regarding payment of monthly premium from 1/2002 to 7/2013 and the maturity value can be paid after deducting the amounts due towards the outstanding loan and accrued interest thereon. In the circumstances, the Complainant has filed this Complaint with an ill intention against the Ops, which is to dismissed and Complainant be directed to pay compensation U/S-26 of C.P.Act, 1986.
4. Heard the Complainant and Ld. Counsels appearing for the Ops, perused the documents filed into the dispute. The admitted facts of the case are that Complainant availed a Life Insurance Policy, under Salary Saving Scheme bearing Policy No.582632213(SSS) and the monthly premium of Rs. 60/- was deducted by the Employer of the Complainant and transferred to office of the LIC of India. It is also admitted that the policy was commenced from the Year-1990 with its maturity date is on the year 2015. It is further admitted that on non-release of maturity amount, Complainant-Policy holder issued an advocate’s Notice which was responded by Op-1, LIC, Branch office and till-date the maturity amount has not been released in favour of Complainant-Policy holder.
On grounds of maintainability of the Complaint, Ops filed a petition dtd. 7/9/2016 and after considering the petition, this Forum vide order no.27 dtd. 13/1/2017 rejected with the observation that, there is no such provisions in the C.P.Act to considered the maintainability of the complaint, after filing of written statement by Ops. However, this Forum also observed that, the question of maintainability will take during the final hearing of the case. The admitted facts of the case are that Complainant is a policy holder of Ops and his disputed maturity amount is still pending with the Op-Corp. for its release. Accordingly, it is safely concluded that Complainant is a ‘consumer’ under Ops as defined U/S2(i) (d) of C.P.Act, 1986 and the Complainant is maintainable.
In the dispute Complainant alleges deficiency of service committed by Ops by not releasing the maturity amount of his Policy, which is matured on the Year 2015 in spite of repeated request and on receipt of Advocate’s Notice. It is also alleged that Complainant- Policy holder has not taken any loan/advance against the policy as averred by the Ops. Countering the allegations, Op-Corp. state that after Jan-2002, Op-1 branch has not received any monthly premium amount rather Op-2 branch has received monthly premium from 8/2013 to 12/2014 and as Complainant-Policy holder had availed a loan of Rs. 2100/- on dt. 2/8/1996 from Op-1 branch against the said policy and the policy holder has never repaid the loan account, for which the release of the maturity amount is not possible, if same is not paid by the Complainant-policy holder. Complainant-Policy holder to clear his stand on payment of monthly premium produced Xerox copies of Acquaintance Register from the month of 8/03 to Nov-2013, Complainant also filed a premium monthly deduction certificate issued by his Employer i.e, Office of the Executive Engineer, irrigation Division, Kendrapara which reflects that monthly premium was deducted regularly from the salary of the Complainant from 2002 to 2013 and deposited in the LIC Policy of Complainant. When the copies of Acquaintance register is filed as list of documents and same is received by Op-Corp. and no satisfactory answer is produced before the Forum for non-payment of monthly premium by the Ops and further production of certificate issued by the Employer regarding deduction of monthly premium strengthen the case of the Complainant that, he was not a defaulter in connection to payment of monthly premium, if for the shake of argument it is presumed that Complainant-Policy holder was defaulter in respect of payment of monthly premium as claimed by Op-Corp., but Op-Corp. has miserably failed to prove the same, and as per the law onus lies with the Op-Corp. to substantiate the allegation. Further, Op-Corp. in their written statement admit that, Op-2 branch Office has received the monthly premium from 8/2013 to 12/2014 against the Policy of the Complainant. This Forum failed to appreciate that how the Op-Corp. received/ accepted the monthly premium from 8/2013 to 12/2014 for such non-payment and discontinuation of the Policy for a long period from Jan-2002 to July-2013. Now, it is shows the lacuna in official functioning of the Op-Corp, where without any enquiry or intimation to the policy holder, blames the Complainant-Policy holder that monthly premium has not been paid for long period. We, discard/reject the plea of the Op-Corp for non-release of maturity amount on the grounds of non-payment of monthly premium and as per the documents filed by Complainant, it is clear that monthly premiums were deducted from the salary of the Complainant regularly for the disputed period and same is transferred and deposited against policy of the Complainant.
The next-point of non-release of matured amount of Complainant’s policy, Op-Corp. state that as the Complainant-policy holder availed a loan amount amounting of Rs. 2100/- against the Policy on dt. 2/8/1996 and has not repaid the loan amount, unless the closure of the loan, which includes the principal and interest, the maturity amount cannot be paid. Complainant-Policy holder challenge the sanction of any loan against the Policy and filed petition before this Forum to call for loan particulars from the Ops. Accordingly, considering the petition, this Forum vide order no. 29 dt. 18/1/2017 directed Ops to furnish the disputed loan particulars for proper adjudication of the dispute, but
Op-Corp failed to produce any such documents of loan of complainant-policy holder against the Policy. It is clear from the non-production of loan document that Op-Corp. is taking such pleas without any prime facie evidence. We are of unanimous, view that such negligent attitude of Op-Corp. by not releasing the matured amount is nothing, but deficiency in service as defined in the C.P.Act, 1986 and Complainant deserves to get his matured amount with other financial benefits as per the terms and conditions of the Policy and further the acts of Op-Corp. definitely caused financial loss and mental agony to Complainant-Policy holder before this Forum to call for loan particulars from the Ops. Accordingly, considering the petition, this Forum vide order no. 29 dt. 18/1/2017 directed Ops to furnish the disputed loan particulars for proper adjudication of the dispute, but Op-Corp failed to produce any such documents of loan of complainant-policy holder against the Policy. It is clear from the non-production of loan document that Op-Corp. is taking such pleas without any prime facie evidence. We are of unanimous, view that such negligent attitude of Op-Corp. by not releasing the matured amount is nothing, but deficiency in service as defined in the C.P.Act, 1986 and Complainant deserves to get his matured amount with other financial benefits as per the terms and conditions of the Policy and further the acts of Op-Corp. definitely caused financial loss and mental agony to Complainant-Policy holder before this Forum to call for loan particulars from the Ops. Accordingly, considering the petition, this Forum vide order no. 29 dt. 18/1/2017 directed Ops to furnish the disputed loan particulars for proper adjudication of the dispute, butOp-Corp failed to produce any such documents of loan of complainant-policy holder against the Policy. It is clear from the non-production of loan document that Op-Corp. is taking such pleas without any prime facie evidence. We are of unanimous, view that such negligent attitude of Op-Corp. by not releasing the matured amount is nothing, but deficiency in service as defined in the C.P.Act, 1986 and Complainant deserves to get his matured amount with other financial benefits as per the terms and conditions of the Policy and further the acts of Op-Corp. definitely caused financial loss and mental agony to Complainant-Policy holder.
Having observations reflected above, it is directed that Ops will release the maturity amount, along with other legitimate financial benefits to the Complainant-Policy holder against the Policy no. 582632213(SSS) as per the terms and conditions of the Policy within one month of receipt of the application by Policy holder for release of maturity amount, if not applied earlier by the Policy holder. It is further directed that, Op Corp. will pay 6% interest on matured amount calculating from date of maturity to till its realization along with Rs. 1000/- (Rs. one thousand only) as cost of litigation. The entire process will be completed within 60(Sixty) days of receipt of this order, failing which action will be initiated against the Op-Corp. as per the provisions of C.P.Act.
Accordingly, the complaint is allowed in part on contest, with cost.
Pronounced in the open Court, this 22th day of September,2017.
I, agree. I, agree.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
