O R D E R
Per Smt T. Suneetha, Member:-
The complainant filed this complaint u/s 12 of Consumer Protection Act seeking directions on the opposite parties to pay Rs.40,000/- compensation for loss sustained due to non-delivery of the policy bond mental agony and costs for the complaint.
2. In brief the averments of the complaint are hereunder:
The complainant got policy from the opposite parties department the policy No.R-AP-VJ-EA-70025, on 24-01-2003. Since then she is paying the periodical premium continuously without fail. The 1st opposite party has to send a policy bond to complainant but was not send till now. The complainant wrote a letter to 1st opposite party requesting to issue policy bond. The 1st opposite party replied that they have already send the bond in February 2003 from the office of 2nd opposite party and informed that if the complainant wants duplicate bond she shall consult nearest post office. Subsequently the husband of the complainant wrote letter dated 08-09-2010 , 16-11-10 and 18-11-10 to the opposite parties informing the non – receipt of the bond and to send acknowledgements signed by policy holder if any. But the opposite parties failed to take action in this regard. The Opposite parties are negligent and committed deficiency of service due to which complainant sustained huge loss and suffered mental agony. Therefore the opposite parties shall compensate the complainant. Hence the complaint.
3. The following is the version of opposite parties in brief :
The complainant was issued a Rural Postal Life Insurance Policy bearing No. R-AP-VJ-EA-70025 for sum assured Rs.20,000/- with date of acceptance on 24-01-2003 and maturity date as 23-01-2019. The Competent Authority issued pass book and policy bond in the form of complainant. But the complainant made request through letter to send policy bond. The 1st opposite party has issued bond in February 2003 from the Post Master General, Vijayawada Region, Vijayawada and informed to the complainant through letter No. RPL1/Duplicate/2010 dated025-08-10. Aggrieved by the reply of opposite parties the complainant wrote letters demanding to show the acknowledgement or delivery particulars.
4. It is humbly submitted that as per the Rulings of Department of Posts-India vide Vol VI-Part I the preservation period of records of registration department is 2 years only. In this connection it is submitted that if the complainant has complained within the prescribed time limit, the delivery particulars of the bond would have been supplied by the Department.
5. The complainant was silent for all the 7 years. However the opposite parties has issued duplicate policy bond in favour of complainant Vide RLNo.969 dated 08-02-2012 and redressed the grievance of the complainant.
6. The problem of the complainant was settled by issuing duplicate bond in accordance with the rules and there is no deficiency of service on the part of Department of Posts. The intention of tranquility of the complainant is nothing but she would have lost the bond and unnecessarily blaming the Department of Posts to pay cost for her time barred complaint.
7. As such, the Hon’ble Forum may be pleased to dismiss the complaint as the grievance of the complainant was redressed.
8. Both the parties have filed their respective affidavits. Ex.A1 to A12 were marked on behalf of the complainant and Ex.B1 was marked on behalf of the opposite parties.
9. Now the points that arose for consideration in this complaint are:
1. Whether the complaint is time barred?
2. Whether the opposite parties committed deficiency of service?
3. To what relief the complainant is entitled to?
10. POINT NO.1 : The complainant took Rural Postal Life Insurance Policy from the 1st opposite party on 24-01-2003 with the maturity date as 23-01-2019. The complainant raised the issue of policy bond which is to be obtained from the 1st opposite party in the year 2010 by sending the letter dated 06-08-10 to the 1st opposite party requesting to send the policy bond in favour of the complainant. Since, the policy is continuing and the date of maturity is 23-01-2019, the complainant can raise any matter regarding the policy any time before such maturity date. Therefore the complaint is under limitation and the Forum can entertain the complaint.
11. POINT NO. 2: The complainant was not issued the policy bond by the 1st opposite party inspite of several requests made by the complainant. The 1st opposite party has sent a letter to the complainant stating that it has dispatched the said policy bond in February, 2003 itself. The complainant denying the statement of the 1st opposite party sent a letter to show the acknowledgement regarding the receipt of such policy bond by the complainant. The 1st opposite party did not file any such acknowledgment showing the reason that the preservation period of the records of the registration department is 2 years if the complainant had complained within the prescribed time limit the delivery particulars of the bond would have been supplied by the department.
12. 1st opposite party could not prove that it has issued the policy bond to the complainant. In these circumstances, adverse inference can be drawn that the 1st opposite party failed to issue the policy bond to the complainant. It amounts to deficiency of service. The point is answered accordingly.
13. POINT NO. 3: The 1st opposite party issued duplicate policy bond infavour of the complainant vide RL No. 969 dated 08-02-2012 i.e. during the proceedings of the case, which was marked as Ex.A-12 by the complainant.
14. The complainant alleged that he sustained huge monitory loss and great mental agony. The complainant in his pleadings could not explain how he sustained huge monitory loss. The Forum opines that the complainant must have under gone mental agony because she must have felt insecure about the amount paid by her towards premium to the 1st opposite party.
15. Under these circumstances taking in view the negligence and deficiency of service on the opposite parties in not issuing the policy bond in time the Forum comes to a considered opinion that making opposite parties liable for their acts and directing the opposite parties to compensate the complainant by giving compensation of Rs.2,000/- for mental agony and Rs.1,000/- towards the costs of complaint would meet the ends of justice.
16. In the result, the complaint is allowed in part, in terms as indicated below :
1. The opposite parties 1 & 2 are directed to pay sum of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand only) as compensation for mental agony to the complainant.
2. The opposite parties 1 &2 are directed to pay a sum of Rs.1000/- towards costs of the complaint to the complainant.
Above order shall be complied within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which, the amounts ordered in item No.1 shall also carry interest at 9% p.a. till the date of realization.
Typed to my dictation by Junior Stenographer, corrected by us and pronounced in the open Forum dated this the, 28th day of May, 2012.
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
DOCUMENTS MARKED
For Complainant:
Ex.Nos. |
DATE |
DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENTS |
A1 |
06-08-11 |
Xerox copy of latter sent to the 1st opposite party by complainant. |
A2 |
06-08-10 |
Certificate of posting (Original) |
A3 |
25-08-10 |
Reply notice from the 1st opposite party. |
A4 |
25-08-10 |
Cover of postal department (original) |
A5 |
08-09-10 |
Letter sent to the 1st & 2nd opposite parties . |
A6 |
08-09-10 |
Certificate of posting (Original) |
A7 |
16-11-10 |
Letter sent to the 1st & 2nd opposite parties . |
A8 |
16-11-10 |
Certificate of posting (Original) |
A9 |
18-11-10 |
Certificate of posting (Original) |
A10 |
18-11-10 |
Xerox copy of Letter to the 2nd opposite party |
A11 |
24-01-03 |
Original Pass Book issued by the opposite parties. |
A12 |
07-02-2012 |
Xerox copy of R.P.L.I Bond |
For opposite party:
Ex.Nos. |
DATE |
DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENTS |
B1 |
08-02-12 |
Xerox copy of Uninsured Registered articles of the Letter. |
PRESIDENT
