Complainant Smt.Kulwinder Kaur and Hardev Singh has filed the instant complaint against the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with a prayer that opposite parties be directed to make payment of Rs.3,10,000/- to them in lieu of the Insurance policy alongwith interest @ 18% P.A. from the date of due till its actual realization and also to make payment of compensation amounting to Rs.1,00,000/- on account of mental and physical harassment suffered by them from the hands of the opposite parties, in the interest of justice.

2.       The case of the complainant in brief is that their son namely Gurjant Singh had died on 23.1.2015. He had died wifeless and issueless since he was unmarried at the time of his death and now they are legal heirs of deceased Gurjant Singh being his father and mother. Gurjant Singh had purchased a Truck bearing registration No.PB-13-Q-9034 during his life time for earning his livelihood by way of self employment. He has got financed the said Truck from the opposite parties no.1 to 3 for the amount of Rs.3,10,000/- on 30.8.2014 vide Agreement No.XSHUPVF00001263352. At the time of got financing the said truck by their son, the opposite parties no.1 to 3 had insured the abovesaid Gurjant Singh from the opposite party no.4 against policy No.CP000039 which was commenced on 30.8.2014. They have further pleaded that Gurjant Singh during his life time used to repay the financed amount to the opposite parties in installments and after his demise, they have made the payments of the outstanding financed amount to the opposite parties no.1 to 3 amounting to Rs.2,20,000/- as one time settlement and accordingly the opposite parties no.1 to 3 have issued NOC to them. Immediately after the death of Gurjant Singh, the information regarding his death was sent to the opposite parties no.1 to 3, then they got completed the formalities from them (complainants) and they told them that they have sent the Insurance claim of the deceased to the Head office of the Insurance Company i.e. opposite party no.4 for the claim of the deceased Gurjant Singh and information regarding the same was sent to the complainants and then amount of the Insurance of Gurjant Singh will be disbursed to them. Even it was allured by them that the opposite party no.4 will make the payment of Rs.3,10,000/- alongwith interest @ 18% P.A. from the date of due till its actual realization, but so far the opposite parties have not made any payment to them. Thereafter they had filed Consumer complaint against the opposite parties no.1 to 3 and Cholamandalam Insurance Company, who have appeared before this Ld.Forum and had stated that the deceased Gurjant Singh was insured with the opposite party no.4 and as such they have withdrawn the said complaint and filed the instant complaint after impleading the opposite party no.4 HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company Limited.  They have next pleaded that they have requested the opposite parties to make the payment of the Insurance claim amounting to Rs.3,10,000/- to them in lieu of the Insurance Policy alongwith interest @ 18% P.M. from the date of due till its actual realization, but they have refused to admit their claim. Due to the illegal act and conduct of the opposite parties, they have suffered great loss and also suffered mental harassment, so there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence this complaint.

3.        Upon notice, the opposite parties no.1 to 3 appeared and filed their joint written reply through their counsel by taking the preliminary objections that the complaint is not maintainable; complainant has no locus standi to file the present complaint; complainant has no cause of action to file the present complaint; the complaint is bad for non-joinder and mis-joinder of necessary parties; this Hon’ble Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain and try the present complaint and complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed as the complainant has taken contradictory stand in the present complaint and the complaint filed earlier, which was dismissed as withdrawn on 23.12.2015 and the present complaint is in continuous of the said complaint. The present complaint is filed while taking contradictory stand.  On merits, it was stated that Gurjant Singh has purchased a truck for earning his livelihood was wrong. All other averments made in the complaint have been denied and lastly the complaint has been prayed to be dismissed.

4.     Opposite party 4 appeared and filed its written reply through its counsel by taking the preliminary objections that the complainant has no cause of action to file the present complaint; the complaint of the complainant is vague and premature. The complainant in the present complaint is alleging that the deceased was insured with the opposite party but no document or any claim has been provided to the opposite party and even not mentioned in the written statement. It is not possible to trace whether any claim has been filed or not in the absence of any document in this regard. So, the complaint is premature and liable to be dismissed. The complainant never approached the opposite party nor ever filed any claim. So, the complaint is liable to be dismissed. Neither any claim has been filed nor any relevant document has ever been sent to the opposite party and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and it is the complainant who is at fault and failed to fulfill his part of obligation. On merits, it was submitted that no claim nor any document has been produced on the file to show that any intimation or claim has ever been filed before the opposite party and as such in the absence of these documents, it become clear that the complainant never approached the opposite party and the complaint is premature. It was wrong and denied that any intimation was sent to the Head office of the Insurance Company.  It was further denied that the opposite party no.3 allured that they will make the payment of Rs.3,10,000/- alongwith interest. The story made by the complainant is false and frivolous. Even after verification of policy the liability if any is only as per terms and conditions of the policy but as already stated no such claim has ever been filed and even the policy has not been still verified.  All other averments made in the complaint have been denied and lastly the complaint has been prayed to be dismissed.

5.         Counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.C-1 alongwith other documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C12 and closed the evidence. 

6.         Sh.Vikal Sharma Authorized Representative of opposite parties no.1 to 3 tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.OP1,2,3/1 alongwith other documents Ex.OP1,2,3/2  to Ex.OP1,2,3/4 and closed the evidence.

7.       Counsel for the opposite party no.4 tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh.Amit Khanna Deputy Manager Legal Ex.OP-4/1 and closed the evidence.

8.       We have examined all the documents/evidence produced on record and have also duly considered and perused the arguments duly put forth by the learned counsels for both the sides, while adjudicating the present complaint. From the pleadings and evidence on record we find that the present complaint is premature since the opposite party no.4 has denied of having received any claim information in this regard and has not yet finally decided the insurance claim of the complainants. As per the version of the OP4 there is no deficiency in services on their part as no claim nor even any document in this regard has been filed or produced on record by the complainants. We also did not find any evidence from complainant side of having ever lodged the claim with the OP4. The present complaint being premature, thus we dispose of the complaint and direct the complainant to approach the opposite party no.4 and submit the requisite relevant documents/information desired by them for settling the insurance claim within 15 days of the receipt of these orders and further direct the opposite party no.4 insurance providers to decide the claim as per the terms and conditions of the policy within 30 days of the receipt of documents/claim application from the complainant. The opposite party is further directed to decide insurance claim duly filed by the complainants duly verified as per the settled procedure laid down by their regulating Agency IRDA.

9.     Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned.

                                                                           (Naveen Puri)

                                                                                President                                                                                                   

ANNOUNCED:                                            (Jagdeep Kaur)

July 22, 2016                                                            Member                      

*MK*