West Bengal

Birbhum

CC/24/2017

Rabindra Parakh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Branch Manager, National INS Co Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Sanjit Kr Acharya

29 Feb 2024

ORDER

Shri Sudip Majumder   President in Charge.

            The complainant/petitioner files this case U/S 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The fact of the case in brief is that one Rabindra Parakh, permanent resident of P.O. and P.S. Sainthia, District .Birbhum purchased a Mediclaim Policy from the  OP No. 1/National Insurance Co. Ltd. being Policy No. 150401501610000081 which was valid from 17/08/2016 to 16/08/2017 and by this way the complainant/insured became a consumer/customer of the OP No. 1 i.e. Insurance Company. That the complainant Rabindra Parakh along with three others namely Hema Parakh, Siddharth Parakh, Priyadarshini Parakh were the insured under the aforesaid policy and the policy was valid from 17/08/2016 to 16/08/2017.

It is the further case of the complainant that the complainant’s son Siddharth Parakh was suffering from Dengue and for that he was admitted at Apollo Gleneagles Hospital, Kolkata on 18/09/2016 and he was treated therein. The doctor diagnosed the ailment of the patient as Dengue fever with Thrombocytopenia and thereafter he was discharged on 21/09/2016. That the insured Rabindra Parakh incurred expenses for the treatment of his son amounting to Rs. 65,481/.

            It is the next case of the complainant that after treatment  of his son the complainant/insured returned to his house and thereafter  on 04/10/2016 the complainant/insured lodged his legitimate claim amounting to Rs. 65,481/ (Sixty five thousand four hundred eighty one only) before the insurance company with all relevant papers in original.

           

 

The OP Insurance Company acknowledged the same on the same date. But, the OP Insurance Company did not settle the claim till date.

            It is the specific case of the complainant that thereafter the complainant had been to the office of the OP Insurance Company for settlement of the claim. The OP Insurance Company informed the complainant that the cheque being No. 475123 dated 01/08/2016 of Rs. 22,543/ has been returned dishonoured and for that the policy has been cancelled. That the information is nothing but false as during that period there was sufficient fund in the S.B.A/C. being No. 475123 dated 01/08/2016 in favour of National Insurance Company Limited.

            Hence, after finding no other alternative the complainant is compelled to file this complaint before this Forum/Commission for proper relief and prays:

1. To pass an order directing the OP to pay Rs. 65,481/ as insurance claim.
2. To pass an order directing the OP to pay interest @ 12% p.a. on Rs. 65,481/ since 20/09/2016.
3. To pass an order directing the OP to pay Rs. 10,000/ as litigation cost.
4. For other relief/reliefs.

The OP No. 1/National Insurance Company Limited., Suri Branch has contested the case by filing written version denying all material allegation of the complainant and stated that there was no deficiency in service on the part of the OP No. 1 and the case is not maintainable, either in law or in fact.

OP No. 1/National Insurance Company Limited stated in Para 15 of their written version as “…..the said policy was cancelled due to dishonored cheque Vide No. 475123 dated 01/08/2016 cheque return memo No. dt. 03/08/2016 deposited by the complainant at the time of proposal. As there was no consideration received there was no privity of contract the aforesaid policy was VOLD AB INITIO.”

OP No. 1/National Insurance Company Limited further stated in Para 17 of their written version as “That in this regard O.P. National Insurance Com. informed the said incident to the complainant in due time in writing and also orally.”

Ultimately the OP No. 1 prayed for dismissal of the case.

            Both the parties submitted written notes on argument (W/N/A). Some documents have also been filed by the complainant’s side and those were compared with original documents. Thereafter, respective Ld. Advocates for the OP No. 1 also submitted some documents with Firisti.

 

 

Heard Ld. Advocates for both sides.

            Considered.

            Perused all the documents.

Points for determination/Issues

1.  Whether the complainant is a consumer as per definition of the term ‘Consumer’ of the C.P Act. ?
2. Whether this Commission has jurisdiction to try this case?
3. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the Ops?
4. Whether the complainant is entitled to get any other relief or reliefs as prayed for?

Decision with reasons

Point No. 1:

            In this case, the complainant purchased a Mediclaim policy from the OP No. 1being Policy No. 150401501610000081  on payment of proper fees and this policy is valid from 17/08/2016 to 16/08/2017. Thus, the complainant is a consumer under the OP/National Insurance Company Ltd. and the                 OP No. 1/National Insurance Company Ltd. is the service provider. Hence, the complainant is a consumer as per Sec. 2(1)d(ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Point No. 2:

            Pecuniary jurisdiction of this Forum/Commission as per Sec. 11(1) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 i.e. Rs. 20,00,000/. OP No. 1/National Insurance Co. Ltd., Suri Branch situated in Birbhum District i.e. within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum/Commission as per Sec. 11(2) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. So, this Forum/Commission has territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction.

In this case, the cause of action arose from 18/09/2016 and the case has been filed on 01/03/2017 and as such it can be said that the complainant has filed this case within the statutory period of the C.P. Act, 1986 and, as such, the instant complaint is not barred by limitation U/S 24A of the C.P. Act, 1986.

Point Nos. 3 & 4:

Both the points are taken together for convenience of discussion as they are related to each other.

It appears from the documentary evidence as available in the case record that the complainant issued a cheque being No. 475123 dated 01/08/2016 amounting for Rs. 22,543/ from his CC Account being No. 00000011608969973 at SBI, Sainthia Branch in the name of OP No. 1/ National Insurance Company Limited for purchasing a Mediclaim Policy being No. 150401501610000081.

Thereafter, the complainant claim Rs. 65,481/ from the OP Insurance Company as expenses of his son’s treatment at Apollo Gleneagles Hospital, Kolkata.

 

 

 

 

The OP Insurance Company informed the complainant vide letter dated 17/08/2016 that “we regret to inform you that payment of premium against Policy No. 150401501610000081 (collection No. 150401811610000680 dt. 01/08/2016) vide cheque No. 475123 dt. 31/07/2016 drawn by RABINDRA PARAKH on State Bank of India SBI-Sainthia for Rs. 22,543/ accounted by us against the above mentioned receipt no has been returned unpaid by the Bank with the remark……….. Please note that the above mentioned Policy/Endorsement collection stands cancelled since inception along with the Cover Note No. N/A dt. N/A for Rs. 22,543/- and we are not on risk in respect of the above policy/ cover note issued to you.”

Ld. Advocate for the complainant argued that no letter received from OP Insurance Company regarding the said dishjo0ured cheque. The OP Insurance Company failed to produce the postal track consignment of the said letter whether the letter was served to the complainant or not.

Ld. Advocate for the complainant further argued that during the period he has sufficient balance in his Bank account.

OP Insurance Company on 09/08/2016 collected the return reason of said dishonoured cheque as EXCEEDS ARRANGEMENT.

From the above discussion, this Commission is of the view that any cheque may be dishonoured for some reason. In the instant case, after issuing of the said cheque by complainant it was the duty of the complainant that whether the said cheque was properly encashed or not. The complainant could search the information and be sure from Mobile SMS from Bank or Bank statement or updated Pass Book.

We also observed that the complainant did not pay any premium for the said policy due to dishonour of the said cheque. As the OP Insurance Company was not provided with any consideration from the complainant for the said policy, there was no contract between the parties. Mere fill up of proposal form is not absolute for any contract of insurance. It was clearly stated in the Policy certificate as “It is warranted that IN CASE OF DISHONOUR OF THE PREMIUM CHEQUE, THIS DOCUMENT STANDS AUTOMATICALLY CANCELLED AB-INITIO.”

Ld.  Advocate for the OP Insurance Company cited few ruling in support of their case.... National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Seema Malhotra (2001) 3 SCC 151 and Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Jhaman Mian 2004 (2) PLJR 813......“If the premium has not been paid and the cheque in lieu of premium has bounced the insurance contract is void and insurer cannot be directed to pay the claim.”

In Pradeep Kumar Jain Vs. CITI Bank (1999) 6 SCC 361...... “Mere handing over of cheque to Bankers to be sent to Insurer would not result in automatic renewal of policy.”

 

 

 

In the light of observation made by their Lordship in the above decision we find us safe to follow them and apply the ratio in the present dispute.

In the instant case, it is an established position that the OP Insurance Company received no consideration money as premium for the said policy from the complainant. So, the contract of insurance policy between the parties is void.

In that analogy, we are sorry not to accede to the prayer made by the complainant in this case. So, the case fails.

Hence, it is,

            O R D E R E D,

                                        that the instant C.F. Case No. 24/2017 be and the same is dismissed on contest but without any costs.

The instant case is thus disposed of.

Let a copy of this order be given/handed over to the parties to this case free of cost.