In the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Murshidabad

Berhampore, Murshidabad.

                                                                                                 Case No. C.C/178 /2015

Date of filing: 23/12/2015                                                                                                                            Date of Final Order: 17/03/2015

Ersad Sk.

S/O-Lt. Ramjan Sk.

Vill.& P.O.-Dhulauri.

Dist- Murshidabad, PIN-742308. ……………………………...Complainant                                                 

                                                          - Vs-

a). Branch  Manager,

Nabipur S.K.U.S,Vill.&P.S.- Nabipur.

P.S.- Raninagar.Dist.- Murshidabad.

 PIN-742308.

b).Begama Bibi.w/o-Ersad Sk.           

c).Shariful Sk.

d). Asraful Sk. both Sons of Lt. Ersad Sk.

all are residing at Vill & P.O.-Dhulauri.

P.S.- Domkal. Dist. Murshidabad.

Pin-742308.

e). Anjeera Bibi. w/o- Kalu Sk.

residing at Vill.Aralpara.P.O.-Nabipur.

P.S.- Raninagar.Dist.- Murshidabad.

 PIN-742308.                           …………….………………….  Opposite Party

                      Present:    Hon’ble President,Anupam Bhattacharjyya.

                                         Hon’ble Member,  Samaresh Kumar Mitra.

                                         Hon’ble Member,  Pranati Ali.           

FINAL ORDER

Samaresh Kumar Mitra, Member.  

         This complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of C. P. Act, 1986 praying for passing an order directing the OP No.1 to pay the share of the petitioner out of the amount of Rs.50,000/- together with interest and compensation of Rs.2,000/- for mental pain and agony.

                The case of the complainant, in brief, is that his son Saiful Sk died on 15.06.2011 leaving father namely the complainant, mother-OP No.2 and two brothers namely OP Nos. 3 and 4 and wife namely OP No.5. Saiful Sk, during his life time, invested a sum of Rs.50,000/- before the LICI, Islampur Branch vide Policy No. 425587154 and put his  wife –OP No.5 as nominee of the said policy. Saiful Sk. was issueless. Immediately after his death his wife-OP No.5 married to one Kalu Sk. Being the nominee of the said policy OP No.5 withdrew the entire amount from LICI. Thereafter, the complainant filed a suit bearing No. O.S.47/2012 before the Ld. Civil Judge, Jr. Division, 1^st Court at Berhampore against the OP Parties claiming that the complainant and the OP Nos. 2 to 4 jointly have 12 anas share in the said amount . After hearing the Ld. Court was pleased to pass an order of temporary injunction and the complainant got ex parte decree and the Ld. Civil Judge, Jr. Divn.1^st Court at Berhampore was pleased to pass an order declaring 12 anas share in the said policy in favour of the complainant. Thereafter, he went to the OP No.1 with the order of the Ld. Judge, Civil Court for getting his share but the Op No.1 refused to pay any amount in favour of the complainant. The complainant served a notice through his Ld. Advocate on 18.12.2013 but in vain. The OP did not pay any heed to that effect. It is a clear deficiency in service on the part of the OP No.1. For this the complainant getting no alternative bound to file this case for getting proper reliefs before this Forum for redressal.

    The OP No.(a) getting notice from this Forum appeared personally and filed hazira and informed that the Nabipur Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Ltd. is ready to furnish document as to payment. That on 24.02.2016 the OP produced a Xerox copy of deposit voucher dated 13.01.2016 , in the account being No.4510 in the name of  Sariful Sk.  deposited by Anjeera Bibi. Another Xerox copy of pay order dated 13.01.2016 in which the OP No.5 Anjeera Bibi withdrew a sum of Rs.55861.00 from the A/c.No.3102 of the OP No.(a). He also filed Xerox copy of withdrawal voucher dated 13.01.2016 of OP No. (a)  being A/c No.4510, a sum of Rs.42096.00 withdrew by  Ersad Sk., Begama Bibi,Sariful Sk. & Asraful Sk. He also stated that complainant and the OP Nos.b,c,d&e received/withdrew the amounts from the OP No. (a)  so he/OP No. (a)  is not deficient in providing service to the complainant. The Agent on behalf of the complainant admitted that the money has been disbursed among the complainant and the OPs in accordance with the order of civil court so there is no allegation in between the parties. The other OPs except OP No. (a) did not turn up despite receiving notice, so the proceeding run ex-parte against them.

            So from the above discussion and perusing the documents in the record we may safely conclude that the dispute in between the parties is no more as the complainant and the OPs received their shares as decided by the civil court and the OP No. (a)  disbursed the amounts to the parties.

          Hence the deficiency of the OPs is not tenable at this point. So the complaint is liable to rejected with no order as to cost.                                                      ORDER

          Hence it is ordered that the Complaint Case No.178/2015 be and the same is dismissed on contest with no order as to cost.

         Let a plain copy of this Order be supplied free of cost to the parties/their Ld. Advocates/Agents on record by hand under proper acknowledgement/sent by ordinary post forthwith, for information & necessary action.

           Dictated and Corrected by me.