This complaint is coming on for final hearing before us in the presence of Sri K.Simhachalam, Advocate for the complainant and Sri K.Venkateswara  Rao, Advocate for opposite parties and having stood over for consideration, the Forum made the following:-

O   R   D   E   R

          This is a complaint filed under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act seeking the relief to direct the O.Ps. to pay the policy amount of Rs.1 lakh together with profits and interest @ 24%p.a., from 3-6-12 till payment is made and to pay Rs.25,000/- towards damages for causing mental agony and inconvenience and to pay Rs.5000/- towards cost of the complainant on the following averments.

          The complainant is the widow of late Rama Krishnacharyulu who paid an amount of Rs.5000/- to the O.P. towards policy premium vide proposal No.2669 dt.31-3-2011 for obtaining policy by name LIC’s Jeevan Saral for an assured sum of Rs.1 Lakh.   The amount was paid to Development Officer of the O.P. who issued a proposal deposit receipt for the said amount of Rs.5,000/-.  And the deceased has shown the complainant as nominee on the policy proposal form.  The complainant has also paid an amount of Rs.5,000/- to the O.P. on the same date for obtaining policy and the O.P. having received the amount have issued the policy vide policy No.69637650 and its date of commencement is from 28-5-2011.  Though the O.P. received the premium amount from the deceased they did not send the policy bond.  The deceased approached the O.P. many a time and requested them to issue the bond but of no avail.  On 3-6-2012 the deceased died upon which the complainant approached the O.P. and requested them to settle the claim due under the policy taken by her husband but the O.P. postponed to settle the claim on one pretext or the other.

          The complainant got issued the notice on 29-8-2012 calling upon the OPs to settle the claim but to no effect.  Hence the complaint.  The O.P. filed counter traversing the material allegations made in the complaint and has averred that there exists no relationship of consumer and service provider in between the complainant and O.P. and the case does not come under the purview of C.P.Act.  It is averred that in the month of May, 2011 the complainant and her husband have submitted proposal forms and the proposal on the life of complainant was in order.  The O.P. allotted the policy for which the deceased Acharyulu was the nominee.  The proposal of the deceased was referred to divisional office for a decision and the D.O. has called for submission of fresh medical report occupation of the proponent etc.  The proposal of the deceased was returned to the Branch Office on 2-8-2011 and the said fact was intimated to the deceased by way of a letter on 16-8-2011 requesting him to fulfill of the requirements and as the deceased did not furnish the requirements the amount paid by him was deposited in unclaimed A/c as per rule and the O.Ps. are ready to pay the said amount to the complainant.

          It is averred that as the proposal of the deceased was not accepted by the LIC, there exists no concluded contract in between the parties and hence there is no deficiency on the part of O.P.  The complaint merits no consideration and

is therefore liable to be dismissed.

In support of complainants case the affidavit evidence of P.W.1 is filed and A.1 to A.5 are marked.  On behalf of O.Ps. affidavit evidence of R.W.1 is filed and B.1 to B.3 are marked.  The advocate for respective parties submitted their written as well as oral arguments.

          Now the point for consideration is whether the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs prayed for?

  Basing on the evidence available on record the learned advocate for the complainant has contended that the deceased husband of the complainant paid a sum of Rs.5000/- towards policy premium and shown the complainant to be his nominee and though the O.Ps. have received the said sum they did not issue policy document and though the deceased made a request to the O.Ps. to issue policy document they did not pay any heed to his words and on 3-6-2012 the husband of the complainant died upon which the complainant made a request to the O.Ps. to settle the claim and as the O.Ps. postponed to settle the claim, the complainant had to file the complaint  and as there is deficiency of service on the part of O.Ps. the complainant is entitled to get the reliefs prayed for.  As against the above said contention the learned counsel for respondent has contended when the proposal of the deceased was referred to Divisional Office for their decision the D.O. has called upon the deceased to submit fresh medical report and other requirements and as the deceased did not comply the request, the amount paid by him was transferred to the unclaimed accounts as per rules and as there is no concluded contract in between the parties, the O.Ps. cannot be construed to be deficient in rendering the service and as such the complaint is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.

          The evidence on record clearly reveals that the deceased has deposited a sum of Rs.5000/- under Ex.A.1 deposit receipt towards the premium of the policy and before the O.Ps. issued LIC bond the deceased died on 12-6-2012 which is evident from Ex.A.2 death certificate.  Though the complainant has taken a plea that the O.Ps. have delayed in issuing policy document deliberately, no evidence is forthcoming to believe the said facts.  As per complainant on 31-5-2011 she too has deposited a sum of Rs.5000/- for issuance of a policy which sum was received by O.P. and issued a policy.  The O.Ps. have no reason to reject the proposal of the deceased for no justifiable grounds.  As per O.Ps. when the proposal of the deceased was referred to the Divisional office, the deceased was called upon to submit fresh medical report, occupation certificate and other documents and as the deceased did not comply the requirements the policy document was  not issued.  Ex.B.2 is the copy of letter alleged to have been sent by the O.Ps. to the deceased calling upon him to submit fresh medical form, proposal form and the document evidencing the occupation of the proposer.  Though the complainant has taken a plea that her deceased husband went to the office of the O.Ps. many a times and requested them to issue policy documents, no cogent evidence is forthcoming to believe the said fact.

          It is not the case of complainant that the policy document was issued by the O.Ps.  Since the Insurance Policy document was not issued it cannot be said that there is concluded contract in between the deceased and O.Ps. in a decision in :

LIC of India v. Raja Vasireddy Komalavalli Kamba & Ors., 1984 (2) SCC 719

Wherein it is held:  Nearly filing any proposal for insurance and depositing 1^st premium with LIC do not create a binding contract between the parties similarly in another decision in:

       Ajay Singh Bhambri Vs. Axis Bank Ltd., & Another I (2014) CPJ 544

Wherein it is held:  There was no liability though the proposal form was submitted and premium was also paid to insurance company, yet policy had not been issued when the death of wife of complainant took place hence no concluded contract came into existence between the parties.  Hence, there is no liability of Insurance company to pay the loan amount to bank on behalf of complainants.

As seen from the principles laid down in the decisions cited supra it is manifest that mere filing any proposal for insurance and depositing any amount towards premium paid to the insurance company do not create a binding contract between the parties.  Coming to case on hand the amount paid by the deceased towards 1^st premium was kept in unclaimed account as per rules for not complying the requirements as mentioned in Ex.B.2 letter.  Since the O.Ps. have not issued any policy document it can safely be concluded that there exists no concluded contract in between the deceased and the O.Ps.  Hence it cannot be said that there is deficiency of service on the part of O.Ps.

In the above said facts and circumstances we are of the considered opinion that there is no merit in this complaint.

Since the O.Ps. have admitted to have received Rs.5,000/- from the deceased towards the first premium of the policy and as they have expressed their desire to return the said amount.  We deem it fit to direct the O.Ps. to return Rs.5000/- with interest @ 9% p.a., to the complainant within one month from the date of this order.

In the result, the complaint is partly allowed directing the O.P. to return back Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) with accrued interest @ 9% p.a., till payment is made to the complainant within one month from today.

Dictated to the Typist, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced by us in the open Forum, this the 3^rd day of April, 2014.

Member                                                           President

CC. 24 of 2013

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

     For P.W.1                                                                  For R.W.1

DOCUMENTS MARKED.

For complainant:-

1. Ex.A.1 Original copy of proposal deposit receipt 31-5-2011
2. Ex.A.2 Original copy of Death Certificate 12-6-2012
3. Ex.A.3 Office copy of Regd.Lawyer notice dt.29-08-2012
4. Ex.A.4 Acknowledgement care dt.31-8-12
5. Ex.A.5 original copy of LIC Bond of complainant dt.10-6-2011

For O.P:

1. Ex.B.1 Proposal form dt.31.5.2011
2. Ex.B.2 Office copy of letter dt.16-8-2011
3. Ex.B.3 Office copy of status report of Policy.

                                                                                                President.