Date of Filing: 12.11.2014

      Date of Order: 10.05.2016

BEFORE THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SHANTHINAGAR BANGALORE -  27.

Dated: 10^TH DAY OF MAY 2016

PRESENT

SRI.SYED ANSER KHALEEM, B.SC., B.Ed.,LL.B.,PRESIDENT

SRI.H.JANARDHAN,B.A.L, LL.B., MEMBER

SMT.BHARATI.B.VIBHUTE, B.E(I.P.) LL.B., MEMBER

COMPLAINT NO.1901/2014

Nalla Linga Reddy,

S/o RajaReddy,

Age 46 years,

H.No.6-70, Pachunoor Post,

Manakondur (M),

Karimnagar Dist-505 505,

Telangana State.                                      Complainant

V/s

1. Branch Manager,

State Bank of India,

Air Cargo Complex,

Old Airport Exit Road,

Konena Agra Hara,

Vimanapura Post,

Bangalore-560 017.

2. Divisional Manager,

New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,

Belapur D.O -170 200,

2^nd Floor, Vindhya

Commercial  Complex,

Navi Mumbai – 400 014.                     Opposite Parties     

ORDER

BY SYED ANSER KHALEEM, PRESIDENT

1.     The complainant in person has filed this complaint U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred in short as O.P) alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.P and prays for direction to the O.P to pay Rs.3,00,000/- towards death claim  of his son along with interest at the rate of 15% per annum and to pay cost of the proceedings.

2.   The brief facts of the complaint is that, the son of the complainant working in Indian Airforce as Air Warrior and expired in an accident on 10.6.2013.  The son of the complainant also covered with personal accident insurance cover whose salary package account holding in the State Bank of India and the policy bearing No.17020042120100000493 issued by the O.P.No.2. When the son of the complainant died the policy is in force i.e. for the period from 4.1.2013 to 3.1.2014 and whose salary account No.32278118816. After funeral ceremony done by the Airforce authorities, it was informed to the State Bank of India about the death claim of the insurance cover amount of Rs.3,00,000/-. The New India Assurance Company vide letter dated 25.09.2013 asked bank to submit some more documents.  After compliance the O.P.No.2 sent a letter to O.P.No.1 stating that no claim is given as within 180 days and there by repudiated the claim. Hence this complaint.

3.      Upon issuance of notice, O.P No.1 remained absent and accordingly O.P.No.1 placed exparte. However, O.P.No.2 filed its version, in the version contended that complaint is neither maintainable in law or on facts and hence the same is liable to be dismissed in limine.  The complainant has not given the material particulars that are required and the complainant is guilty of suppression of facts. O.P.No.2 is also disputed the death of the insured on 10.6.2013.  O.P.No.2 also contended that they have not received any documents from the complainant before this Forum and it is not within their knowledge. The Air Force Authorities vide letter dated 25.06.2013 informed that State Bank of India about the death and to pay insurance cover of Rs.3,00,000/- is not within the knowledge of this O.P.  Hence alleged O.P.No.1 bank is answerable if the delay in sending wrong claim papers. O.P.No.2 in his letter sought for relevant documents like FIR, Panchanama, Final Investigation Report, Photo ID and Residence Proof, Pass Book copy, pay slip copy, Driving License etc in order to process the claim of the complainant and O.P.No.1 had not sent it to the O.P.No.2 earlier. Further O.P.No.1 through its letter dated 25.9.2013 informed both the complainant and O.P.No.1 and that they have not sent claim form copy of FIR, Panchanama, Final Investigation Report, Photo ID and Residence Proof, Pass Book copy, pay slip copy, Driving License etc as required to process the claim of the complainant. However, the same was not furnished to this O.P.No.2 by the complainant. Further O.P.No.2 contended that within 180 days the relevant documents are not submitted and hence they have closed the file as no claim. On other grounds prays for dismissal of the complaint.

4.     To substantiate the above case, the complainant as well as O.Ps are filed their affidavit evidence along with documents.  We have heard the arguments.

5.     On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the following points will arise for our considerations are:-

                                (A)    Whether the complainant has proved

                       deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps?

(B)    Whether the complainant is entitled to the

         relief prayed for in the complaint?

(C)    What order?

6.     Our answers to the above points are:-

POINT (A) and (B) :  In the Affirmative.

POINT (C):  As per the final order

for the following:

REASONS

POINT  No (A):-

7.     On perusing the pleading of the parties, it is an undisputed fact that, son of the complainant is having an account in the O.P.No.1 bank and he is insured with the O.P.No.2. The grievance of the complainant is that whose son met with an accident and succumbed to injuries. When the son of the complainant was died  and the insurance policy is in force and it not in dispute. The only allegation of the complainant is that he has furnished required documents to the OP.No.1 bank but the process is delayed in order to claim the insured amount due to sending of paper to United Insurance company instead of New India Assurance company i.e. O.P.No.2. and subsequently the O.P.No.1 bank by rectifying his mistake sent to the required papers to the O.P.No.2. However per-contra O.P.No.2 contended that they have not received required papers inspite of the intimation given to both complainant  and O.P.No.1 bank.  And hence contended that there is no deficiency in service on their part. Further alleged that the O.P.No.1 bank is negligent in handling the matter. Furthermore contended that they have to process the papers within 180 days and but when he has  not received the papers well in time them will treat as no claim.

8.     On perusing of the copy of the Post Mortem report dated 11.6.2013 it is also reveals that the son of the complainant died in an accident. It is note worthy to mention that the insured was working in Indian Air Force and unfortunately died. The contract of insurance based on the some principles of Ubrima-fide i.e. utmost faith. Once the policy is issued in terms of the contract O.P.No.2 has to honour the same. It is note worthy to mention that, the O.P.No.1 bank as acting as agent of a O.P.No.2 and providing service to its customers when the nominee approaches the bank for claim settlement, the bank has to process the papers in accordance with law at the earliest in order to claim the amount.  Whereas the complainant alleged that O.P.No.1 bank by collecting papers sent to the wrong address and subsequently rectifying the mistake sent to the papers to the O.P.No.2.  It is sheer negligence of the O.P.No.1 bank by not sending the papers well in time and it amounts to deficiency in service.  More-so, O.P.No.1 being the public institution once the complaint is filed and notice is served through the Forum, but for the reasons best known to the O.P.No.1 not come before the Forum to answer the claim made by the complainant.  All these incidents are evident that the negligent attitude of the O.P.No.1 bank, O.P.No.2 alleges that the O.P.No.1 bank and the complainant not sent the required documents in order to honour the claim of the complainant.  Copy of post mortem report clearly reveals that the son of the complainant died on account of accident, hence the dispute is death of the complainant’s son by the O.P.No.2 is not wise enough to take such contention. Though the complainant submits that due to mistake of O.P.No.1 bank, he has send papers through bank to the O.P.No.2 but the O.P.No.2 by taking mere technical grounds closed the file as no claim it also amounts to deficiency in service on the part of O.P.No.2 and also for non-honouring  of the claim based on mere technicalities. Without taken into consideration of the heavy heart of the complainant, it is kind of oppression on the claimant.  Further the object of insurance is also frustrated.  In this back drop of facts and in the light of above discussions, the complainant proved deficiency in service on the part of O.P.No.1 and 2. Accordingly, we answered Point No.(A) in the affirmative.

POINT  No (B):-

9.     On the basis of the available evidence on record and findings given on the Point No.1 in the affirmative, the death of the complainant’s son is not in dispute as well as the insurance policy is in force at the time of death.  Hence O.P.No.1 has to send all required documents to the O.P.No.2 and the O.P.No.2 has to process the claim at the earliest. Also on the basis of available evidence on record the O.P.No.1 bank did not process the papers well in time and send to wrong address and made the complainant to suffer and made wander from pillar to post. Hence, O.P.No.1 bank is liable to pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant along with cost of Rs.2,000/-.  Further O.P.No.2 after receiving all the required documents from the complainant and O.P.No.1 bank has to process the claim and to pay Rs.3,00,000/- to the nominee (complainant) as assured while taking insurance policy by the son of the complainant and it will meet the ends of justice. Accordingly, we answer Point No.(B) in the affirmative.

POINT (C):

10.   On basis of the findings given on the point No.(A) and (B) and in the result we proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

1. The complaint is allowed in part with cost.

2. The O.P.No.1 bank is hereby directed to pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant along with cost of Rs.2,000/-.  Further O.P.No.2 after receiving all the required documents from the complainant and O.P.No.1 bank and O.P No 2 has to process the claim and to pay Rs.3,00,000/- to the complainant (Nominee) as assured while taking the policy by  the son of the complainant.

3. The O.Ps are hereby directed to comply the order of this   Forum within 60 days from the date of receipt of this order and in the event of failure to comply the orders, the O.Ps are liable to pay interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of order till the realization of the amount and submit the compliance report to this Forum within 90 days from the date of receipt of this order.

4. Send a copy of this order to both parties free of cost.

 (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed and computerized by him, corrected and then pronounced by us in the Open Forum on this the 10^th Day of May 2016)

MEMBER                 MEMBER                PRESIDENT

*Rak