Haryana

Charkhi Dadri

CC/312/2021

Smt. Anita - Complainant(s)

Versus

D.D. M (PLI), CPMG, Haryana Circle, - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Naveen Vashisth

27 Sep 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHARKHI DADRI.

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.312 of 2021

DATE OF INSTITUTION: - 13.12.2021

DATE OF ORDER: -         27.09.2024

Smt. Anita wife of Late Sudhanshu Son of Sh. Vijay Kumar, resident of village Santor, Tehsil & District Charkhi Dadri.

 

          ……………Complainant.

 

VERSUS

 

1. D.D.M. (PLI), CPMG, Haryana Circle, 107 Mall Road., Ambala Cantt-133001.
2. Post Master, Postal Department Office, City Charkhi Dadri, Distt. Charkhi Dadri.
3. Superintendent Post Office, Bhiwani Division, Indian Postal Department, Bhiwani, District Bhiwani.
4. Post Master, Head Office Bhiwani, Distt. Bhiwani.

………….. Opposite Party.

 

COMPLAINT U/S 35 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT,2019

 

BEFORE :-  Hon’ble Shri Manjit Singh Naryal, President

                   Hon’ble Shri Dharam Pal Rauhilla, Member

 

Present: - Shri Dharamvir Singh Sheoran, Advocate for complainant.

      Shri Naveen Yadav, IPO (IT)  on behalf of  OPs.

 

ORDER:-

                    The  case of the complainant in brief, is that her husband (now deceased) had obtained Postal Life Insurance Policy No.0000003718987 under Gram Santosh-EA Plan  in his name covering the risk for a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- from opposite parties and paying the monthly installments of Rs. 7,600/- It is alleged that the policy holder deposited the four installments of premium regularly for about 4 months and thereafter due to spread of epidemic Covid-19, the Government had imposed  lockdown in whole country and husband of the complainant could not deposit the installment of month June, 2020 and July, 2020 and he met with roadside accident and died on 07.08.2020.   The complainant is nominee in the above said policy, hence applied for payment of the claim in respect of the policy held by her husband.  It is alleged that she visited many times to the office of the opposite parties regarding this policy claim but the OPs had not paid the maturity amount and other benefits. The complainant further alleged that due to the act and conduct of the OPs, he had to suffer mental agony, physical harassment and financial losses. Hence, it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of OPs and as such she had to file the present complaint.

2.                 On appearance, OPs filed written statement and took preliminary objections and denied the allegations of the complainant. It is submitted that Sudhanshu had paid the installment till May 2020 and insured died on 07.08.2020.  It is submitted that as on the date of death policy was in lapse condition because the premium due after May, 2020 was not paid within period of grace reportedly due to lock down in whole country, but the department of posts continued to work. However the premium could also be paid at nearest post office. Her appeal was rejected by the competent authority on the basis that in this case the fact of  (Rule 56(b)(i) & 56(2) (a) POLI rules 2011 are applicable and same was also intimated vide letter no.LI/-2/Misc/Bhiwani dated 31.12.2020.  Hence, in view of the facts and circumstances mentioned above, there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs and complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed with costs.

3.                In order to make out his case, the complainant has tendered into evidence documents Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-5 alongwith supporting affidavit Ex.CW-1/A and closed the evidence on 03.03.2023.

4.                In reply thereto, the counsel for OPs have tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.RW-1/A and closed the evidence on 26.05.2023.

5.                 We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard the learned counsels for the parties.

6.                 Learned counsel for the complainant reiterated the contents of the complaint. He submitted that the life insured (deceased) made payment of monthly premium from Feb 2020 to May 2020 in time but due to the lockdown the life assured Sudhanshu could not deposit further premium after May 2020 and he died on 07.08.2020.  The counsel for the complainant submitted that reason for not depositing the premium of the policy after May,2020 was due to the lockdown in whole country.  He contended that the OPs are liable to pay the insured amount in full as reason for not depositing premium after May, 2020 was beyond control of the insured (deceased).

7.                Learned counsel for the opposite party reiterated the contents of his reply.  He submitted that the premium was paid by the life assured upto May 2020.  The life assured failed further to pay the due premiums within the grace period and he died on 07.08.2020, at that time the policy in question was lying in lapse condition because the premium due in May 2020 onwards was not paid within the grace period. 

8.                In the context of the pleadings and arguments of the parties, we have examined the relevant material on record.  It is admitted case that the insured (deceased) obtaining  a PLI (Postal Life Insurance Policy) for sum assured  Rs.10,00,000/- on 10.02.2020 and he had deposited monthly premium upto May 2020 and  no premium was paid by the life assured after  May 2020, because of spread of Covid 19 and lockdown all over India. Unfortunately, the life insured died on 07.08.2020 and therefore the complainant filed claim with OP which was repudiated stating that the policy was lying lapsed condition as the premium was not paid after May 2020. The complainant has submitted that premium after May 2020 could not be deposited because of lockdown in the country. The OPs have not appreciated this genuine reason and  psycho-fear  in the minds of everyone about deadly effect of the COVID-19 when no one preferred to come out from their houses. As referred by the complainant, Hon’ble supreme Court vide its judgment dated 10.01.2022 has been given directions that period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall stand excluded for the purpose of limitation. This judgment is not directly applicable in this case. However, its spirit should be taken in a right way in favour of the complainant. Simultaneously, guidelines issued by the Government of India/Haryana Government/Local bodes issued from time to time about lock-down in the country should also be taken into account. The complainant has referred order dated 29.07.2020 issued by the Ministry of Home affairs, Government of India where lockdown in containment zone and unlock 3 guidelines were issued in which there is mention to extend the lockdown in containment zone upto 31.08.2020. In view such circumstances of lockdown, no one can prefer to move out his house. This may be the reason for not depositing installment of premium after May 2020 which justified and acceptable.

9.                In the light of abovementioned facts and prevalent circumstances at that time, we are of the view that OPs are deficient in not making the payment of claim amount/sum assured. Hence, we allow the complaint of the complainant and passed the following order against the OPs:- 

1. To pay the Sum Assured of Rs. 10,00,000/-(Rupees Ten Lakh only) to the complainant  alongwith 9% per annum w.e.f 07.09.2020 (being date after 30 days   from the death of life insured-deceased).
2. To pay Rs. 10,000/- as compensation on account of mental pain and agony  and Rs. 5,000/- as litigation expenses.

The above order be complied within 45 days from the date of passing of this order, otherwise the OPs shall be liable to pay the interest at the rate of 12 % per annum from the date of passing of this order till the date of payment.  Certified copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of costs.  File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.