BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
CACHAR :: SILCHAR
Con. Case No. 17 of 2015
- Smti. Pratima Kairi
D/O- Late Premlal Kairi, Wife of Sri Paresh Kairi.
Vill & P.O- Dariarghat, P/S- Katlicherra,
Dist- Hailakandi, Assam-788165
- Smti. Pranati Kairi
D/O- Late Premlal Kairi, Wife of Sri Mohan Lal Kairi.
Vill & P.O- Sultanicherra, P/S- Katlicherra
Dist- Hailakandi, Assam-788165
- Smti. Purnima Kairi
D/O- Late Premlal Kairi, Wife of Sri Bidhan Prasad Kairi.
Vill –RampurP.O & P/S- Katlicherra
Dist- Hailakandi, Assam-788165Complainant’s
-V/S-
1. Branch Manager, Reliance Life Insurance Co. Ltd.
Jagannath Apartment, 2nd Floor, Hospital Road,
Silchar, Cachar, Assam-788001 O.P.No. 1
2. The Managing Director (Concerned Officer in the Claims Deptt.)
Reliance Life Insurance Co. Ltd. 9th & 10th Floor,
R- Tech Park, Nirlon Compound, Next to Hub Mall,
Behind I-Flex Building, Goregaon (East), Mumbai-400063. O.P.No. 2
3. The Concerned Officer (Registered Office),
Reliance Life Insurance Co. Ltd.
H Block, 1st Floor, Dhirubhai Ambani Knowledge City,
Navi Mumbai, Maharastra-400710 O.P.No. 3
Present: - Sri Bishnu Debnath, President,
District Consumer Forum,
Cachar, Silchar.
Shri Kamal Kumar Sarda, Member,
District Consumer Forum,
Cachar, Silchar.
Appeared: - Mr. Sabyasachi Bhattacharjee, Advocate for the complainant.
Mr. Kajal Chanda, Advocate for the O.Ps.
Date of Evidence 13-06-2016, 20-02-2017, 27-03-2017
Date of written argument 16-11-2018
Date of oral argument 30-07-2018
Date of judgment 16-08-2018
JUDGMENT AND ORDER
Sri Bishnu Debnath,
- Premlal Kairi (Now deceased) purchased Insurance Policy No. 19447505 on 31/10/2011 and another Policy No. 17390319 on 07/07/2010 from Reliance Life Insurance Co. Ltd. for covering his Life risk. But very unfortunately on 19/07/2013 he died. Accordingly, his constituted nominee Sri. Shyamlal Kairi submitted death claim but the O.P, Reliance Life Insurance Co. Ltd. repudiated the claim vide letter dated 29/10/2013 on the plea that false information furnished about age of Premlal Kairi at the time of signing the proposal for purchasing the aforesaid Insurance Policy.
- On being agrived, the nominee went to the Insurance Ombudsmen for redressal but the ombudsmen by order date 19/03/2015 stated that the authenticity of Age proof certificate is not within the jurisdiction of the RPG Rules, 1988 and as such complainant should lodge complain in an appropriate forum for redressal.
- Accordingly, the instant complaint brought before this District Forum as per the provision of the Consumer Protection Act.1986 against the Branch Manager, Reliance Insurance Co. Ltd. Silchar Branch and 2(two) other office of the aforesaid Insurance Co. for award to direct the Insurance Co. to pay sum assured of Rs.7,00,000/- and Rs.9,13,400/- respectively for aforesaid 2(Two) Insurance Policy and compensation etc.
- The Branch Manager of Reliance Insurance Co. and 2 (two) other officer of the said Insurance Co. in their joint W/S stated inter alia that the age proof certificate (School certificate) which has been submitted at the time of putting signature on proposal form was forged and false document. The Actual age of the deceased Premlal Kairi was much more than the age shown in the school certificate and the investigation agency of the Insurance Company collected voter list for the year 2013 from Group member, Danarghat, Kancherra gaon Panchyat in the name of deceased Premlal Kairi in which age of the deceased Premlal Kairi was written 68 years. As such as per the O.P. Insurance Company the claims are rightly repudiated as per provision of Section 45 of the Insurance Act. 1938.
- During hearing the 3 (three) daughter i.e Pratima Kairi, Pronoti Kairi and Purnima Kairi have been substituted in place nominee Shyamla Kairi. Hence, the Complainant side submitted deposition of Shyamlal Kairi, Smti Purnima Kairi, Pranati Kairi, Pratima Kairi and Pinak Kanti Deb and also exhibited same documents including School Certificate to prove the age of the deceased Premlal Kairi. The Insurance Company also submitted deposition of Gautam Goswami, the Branch Manager of Reliance Insurance Co. Silchar Branch and exhibited not only proposal Form but also School certificate which was furnished by the deceased Premlal Kairi at the time of singing the proposal form but also school certificate which was furnished by deceased Premlal Kairi at the time of signing the proposal form. The O.P further exhibited a copy of voter list for the year 2013 in the name of Premlal Kairi. The said DW was cross examined the Ld. Advocate of the Complainant. Thereafter, as court witness I examined Head Master of Kinnarkhal Public High School for clarification about School certificate. The said witness was cross examine by the Ld. Advocate of the Insurance Company.
- After closing evidence both sides, counsels submitted their written argument. I have perused the evidence on record, the written argument and the material on record argument of both sides counsels.
- In this case the crux point as whether the deceased Premlal Kairi furnished a false age proof certificate at the time of purchasing the Insurance policies.
- In the proposal Form vide Ext.A the age of the deceased Premlal Kairi is written 01/07/1961. The DW by adducing evidence tried to establish the fact the deceased Premlal Kairi furnished age proof age certificate vide Ext. B at the time of purchasing the polices. He also deposed that as the claims of those policies were early, so, the Insurance company engaged investigator and during investigation the investigator collected voter list from Panchayat Office vide Ext. C age of the deceased was 68 years. That is why, the Insurance Company concluded that the deceased suppressed the real age.
- I have also gone through the deposition of D.W. 1, 2, 3 & 4. As per their deposition, wife of Premlal Kairi died on 13/02/2018 vide Ext. B death certificate. The said documents is remain unrebuttable in the evidence on record. Thus, it is concluded that wife of Premlal Kairi, Smti Full Kumari Kairi died on 13/02/2008. But as per Ext. C voter list for the year 2013, Full Kumari Kairi, the wife of Premlal Kairi is alive and her age was 50 years. Not only that as per un-rebuttable deposition of P.W-1 to 4 Pratima Kairi is daughter of Premlal Kairi but in the Ext.C voter list it is written against Pratima Kairi that she is a male and age is 32 years. That is why, I do not find any reliability on that document to conclude that at the time of purchasing the Insurance policy the deceased with wrongful intention suppressed the real age. Rather Ext.B school certificate is the age proof document of deceased. As per that certificate Date of birth of deceased Premlal Kairi is 01/07/1961. The said date of birth is written in proposal form vide Ext.A .
- As the O.P./Insurance challenged the truthfulness of the said school certificate, so the Complainant brought Head Teacher of Kinnakhal Public High Shool as P.W-5. He deposed that Ext.20 School certificate of deceased Premlal Kairi was issued from his School. From the evidence I have also found the Ext.35 is the same school certificate but the P.W-5 wanted to say that Ext.20 is the counter folio of Ext.35. That is why, the said witness has been called again for clarification. He appeared and his statement recorded as C.W.-1. He stated inter alia that in the School admission register vide Ext.36 date of birth of deceased Premlal Kairi was not written but it was mention that he was 11 year 6 month on 31/12/1972. If that is the real fact then it can be concluded that his date of birth is 01/07/1961. However, the Ld. Advocate of the Insurance Co. during cross examination put suggestion that Ext.20 and Ext.35 school certificate are false or not issued as per admission register. The admission register is Ext.36. But the Ext.36 admission register is not rebutted or challenged by the Insurance Co. in spite of availing the scope to cross examine the C.W.-1.
- That is why, from the evidence on record I am of opinion that the date of birth on 01/07/1961 is established. So, I do not find any mis-information furnished by the deceased to the proposal Form. So, the legal heirs of the deceased are entitled the relief of receiving of sum insured of both the policy No.19447505 and policy No.17390319. They are also entitled compensation of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand) only for mental agony for not receiving the claim in time and cost of proceeding cost of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five thousand) only.
- With the above, the O.P. 1, 2 & 3 are asked to pay the awarded amount aforesaid on or before 45 days from today because they are both jointly and severally liable to pay the same. In default interest to be paid at the rate of 10% per annum on the total awarded amount from the date of defaulter till realization of the full. Supply free certified copy of the judgment to the parties given under my hand and seal of this District Forum on this the 16th day of August.
