In the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Murshidabad

Berhampore, Murshidabad.

Case No. CC/106/2014

Date of filing: 18 /08 /2014                                                       Date of Final Order: 22/07/2015

  Suktara Biswas,

 W/O- Adiuzzaman Biswas

 Vill.- Joyrampur, P.O.+ P.S.- Domkal

 Dist- Murshidabad ………………………………….Complainant                                                                                        

                       Vs

1).Branch Manager,

Life Insurance Corporation of India,

Chak Islampur Branch,

P.O.& P.S.- Islampur.

Dist.- Murshidabad. PIN-742304

2). Adizumman Biswas,

S/O- Md. Sannaulla Biswas

Vill.-Gobindapur, P.O.- Juginda

P.S.- Domkal, Dist.- Murshidabad………………….   Opposite Party

Mr.Pranab Kumar Das., Ld. Advocate…………………………………for the Complainant.

Mr.Saugata Biswas, Ld. Advocate………………………………………….for the Opposite Party No.1.

                      Present:   Hon’ble President, Anupam Bhattacharyya.           

                                        Hon’ble Member,  Samaresh Kumar Mitra.

FINAL ORDER

Samaresh Kumar Mitra, Member.

                The simple version of this complainant as enumerated in the complaint is that she and OP No.2 jointly insured their life under policy Jeeban Sathi ( Double cover joint life plan) being policy No.420891733 dated 25.12.1993 and sum assured Rs.30,000/- from the OP No.1. The complainant paid the premium on regular basis and on 28.09.2000 the opposite party no.2 took a loan of Rs.6850/- against the said policy but the complainant paid the same in the year 2005. The complainant is a school teacher and in the year 2012 the relationship between the complainant and the OP No.2 became strain and since then the complainant living separately from her husband with two minor daughters. The said policy matured on 25.12.2013 then the complainant went to the office of OP No.1 for getting the matured value with other benefits and she came to know that the OP No.2 filed an objection before the OP No.1 for not to pay the amount to the complainant. Thereafter she visited the OP No.1 several times and requested to pay her the matured amount but no result as the matured amount was required for the education of her minor daughters. Due to non co-operation of Op No.1 she suffered mental pain and agony for which she filed the instant complaint before the Forum for redressal as OP No.1 is deficient in providing service towards its consumer.  

           By appearing through the agent the OP No.1 filed W/V on 17.03.2015 after elapsing a lot of dates and denied the allegations as leveled against him and averred that the policy vide No.420891733 dated 25.12.1993 namely Jeevan Sathi are in the name of the complainant and OP No.2 and several reminders after the maturity has sent by the answering OP but they failed to produce the discharge Form. The complainant came alone for the amount but the OP No.2 put objection before the OP No.1 for not to pay the amount covered by the said policy to the complainant. That as per rules of the said policy namely Joint life plan (Jeevan Sathi) under table 89 no claim and/or maturity may be settled without valid discharge vouchers so if the parties did not submit discharge vouchers before this OP No.1 till then no deficiency of service proved. This answering OP No.1 always willing to discharge its liability if the parties discharge vouchers. But the complainant and the OP No.2 did not produce discharge vouchers to this OP moreover the OP No.2 put objection so he could not discharge its liability. He further averred that when the parties submit discharge voucher this OP No.1 will pay the amount covered by the said policy. So the complaint is liable to be dismissed with cost.

       The OP No.2 appeared by its advocate on 24.9.2014 and filed a petition praying time to file written version on the date fixed. Thereafter the OP No.2 did not file any W/V and/or appeared on dates so the proceeding run ex-parte against the OP No.2.

      The complainant filed evidence on affidavit on 03.07.2015 which is nothing but replica of complaint petition. No new points or averments are raised in the evidence on affidavit.

                Argument as advanced by the agents of the parties on 14.07.2015 heard in full.

            From the discussion herein above, we find the following Issues/Points for consideration.

                                    ISSUES/POINTS   FOR   CONSIDERATION

1. Whether the Complainant ‘Suktara Biswas’ is a ‘Consumer’ of the opposite party?
2. Whether this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the case?
3. Whether the O.Ps carried on unfair trade practice/rendered any deficiency in service towards the Complainant?
4. Whether the complainant proved his case against the opposite party, as alleged and whether the opposite party is liable for compensation to him?

DECISION WITH REASONS

   In the light of discussions here in above we find that the issues/points should be decided based on the above perspectives.

(1).Whether the Complainant ‘Suktara Biswas’ is a ‘Consumer’ of the opposite party?

               From the materials on record it is transparent that the Complainant is a “Consumer” as provided by the spirit of section 2(1)(d)(ii) of the Consumer Protection Act,1986. As the complainant herein being the consumer of the OP, who insured her life before the OP company.

(2).Whether this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the           case?

                Both the complainant and opposite party are residents/carrying on business within the district of Murshidabad. The complaint valued matured amount Rs.30000/-+interest & other benefits and Rs.8,000/-as compensation for harassment & mental agony ad valorem which is within Rs.20,00,000/- limit of this Forum. So, this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the case.      

    (3).Whether the opposite party carried on Unfair Trade Practice/rendered any deficiency in service towards the Complainant?

              The opposite party being the largest Insurance Company of the nation associated with the insurance of a lot of people throughout the nation since a long back with self generated assets i.e. goodwill of the business. It is well settled proposition of law that a contract of insurance is based on the principles of utmost good faith-uberrimae fidei, applicable to both the parties. So, the credibility of the OP Insurance Company is unquestionable and that is why the complainant insured her life before the said company without any doubt.

               Dispute cropped up in between the parties when the complainant did not get the matured value including interest thereupon and other benefits from the insurer i.e. OP No.1. The complainant jointly insured her life with her husband but when the relationship of husband and wife became strain then the husband of the complainant put objection before the OP No.1 so the complainant could not withdraw the sum assured including interest thereupon and other benefits. After getting the objection from the OP NO.2 the OP No.1 insurance company did not disburse the amount in favour of the complainant without the discharge voucher. The OP No.1 is ready to disburse the amount of the complainant after getting the discharge voucher which he stated in the written version. So the complainant showed good gesture upon the complainant.

       After perusing the complaint petition, written version, evidence on affidavit and other documents produced by the parties in dispute and hearing the arguments as advanced by the parties, we are in a considered opinion to make direction upon the OP No.1 to disburse the matured amount including interests and benefits to the Complainant and the OP No.2 equally and the deficiency of the complainant could not be proved as he acted in accordance with the provisions of Insurance policy.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       

  4. Whether the complainant proved his case against the opposite party, as alleged and whether the opposite party is liable for compensation to him?

            The discussion made herein before, we have no hesitation to come in a conclusion that the Complainant is able to prove her case beyond any doubt and the written version or the OP also contributed his role in such proof and the Opposite Party No.1 is not liable to compensate the Complainant as we deem fit and proper.

               Hence, it is ordered that the complaint be and the same is allowed on contest against the Opposite party, without cost.

               The Opposite party No.1 is hereby directed to pay the matured amount of the policy including interest and benefits to the complainant and the OP No.2 equally i.e. 50% each within 30 days from receiving this order.

             No other reliefs are reliefs are awarded to the complainant for harassment and mental agony.

            At the event of failure to comply with the order  the Opposite Party No.1 shall pay cost @ Rs.50/- for each day’s delay, if caused,  on expiry of the aforesaid 30 days by depositing the accrued amount, if any, in the  Consumer legal Aid Account.

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.