Date of Filing:13.03.2008<br /> Date of Order:12.06.2008<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> BEFORE THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SESHADRIPURAM BANGALORE-20<br /> <br /> Dated: 12TH DAY OF JUNE 2008<br /> PRESENT<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri. S.S. NAGARALE, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), President.<br /> Smt. D. LEELAVATHI, M.A.LL.B, Member.<br /> Sri. BALAKRISHNA. V. MASALI, B.A, LL.B. (SPL.), Member.<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> COMPLAINT NO: 703 OF 2008<br /> <br /> Smt. Sarojadevi,<br /> W/o Late Kadligondi,<br /> I Main Road, 7th Cross, <br /> MSR Nagar, Bamgalooru-560 054. Complainant<br /> <br /> V/S<br /> 1. The Divisional Manager,<br /> Life Insurance Corporation of India,<br /> J.C. Road, Bangalore-560 002.<br /> <br /> <br /> 2. The Branch Manager,<br /> Life Insurance Corporation of India,<br /> GMN Complex, Mattikere Main Road, <br /> Bangalore-560 054. <br /> <br /> 3. Personal Manager (Finance Central Pay Bills),<br /> Bharat Electronics, Jalahalli Post,<br /> Bangalore-560 013. Opposite Parties<br /> <br /> ORDER<br /> By the President Sri. S.S. Nagarale<br /> <br /> This is a complaint filed by the complainant Smt. Sarojadevi stating that her deceased husband was working at Bharat Electronics, Jalahalli and the deceased had taken LIC policy for Rs.5,000/- on 31/1/1974 with policy No.839322979. The maturity value of the policy was on 28/6/1992. The husband of the complainant had died on 23/9/1991 while in service. She stated that the original policy had lost and found recently. She went to LIC Yeshawanthpur branch and enquired the matter. They asked to submit certificate from BEL about deductions in the salary and accordingly, submitted certificate. In spite of that the opposite party LIC is not giving the maturity amount. Therefore, she has requested that opposite party may be directed to pay the maturity amount with bonus.<br /> 2. Notice was issued to opposite parties. In the defence version it is stated that, the belated claim cannot be considered at this stage. Without seeing the policy file it is not possible to consider the claim. Old records are normally destroyed after five years. In view of the lapse of time opposite party cannot be able to found out the truth of the claim. <br /> 3. Arguments are heard. <br /> REASONS<br /> <br /> 4. I have perused the complaint and defence version. The complainant has produced copy of the policy No.839322979. The date of commencement of policy was 28/6/1974. Sum assured was Rs.5,000/-. The date of maturity was 28/6/1992. The present complainant Smt. Sarojadevi is the nominee U/sec.13 of the Insurance Act, 1938. The complainant has produced death certificate of her husband. As per this certificate H.S. Kadligondi died on 23/9/1991. The complainant Smt. Sarojadevi being the wife and nominee to the policy is entitled to claim the policy amount from the opposite party. The complainant has stated that original policy bond was lost and recently it was found and she has submitted the policy bond to the opposite party. If at all the complainant had submitted the original policy to the opposite party for settling the claim it becomes duty and obligation of the LIC of India to settle the claim and pay the maturity amount as per law. The opposite party shall be directed to settle the claim and pay the maturity amount of the policy to the complainant along with bonus in case the original policy bond is produced by the complainant. The opposite party cannot deny the payment of maturity value on the ground that it was a old case and records are normally destroyed after five years etc.,. The opposite party has not produced any rules or regulations to show that policy records will be destroyed after five years. So under these circumstances, in the absence of any rules or regulations or law the LIC cannot deny or escape from its liability to pay the maturity value of the policy to the complainant. The complainant is a poor widow she must be helped in all manners by the opposite party in processing her claim. The opposite party should take all possible measures or any undertaking of complainant required for processing claim and the opposite party should see that the complainant should get justice and relief. So that, it will be some help to her. Consumer Protection Act is enacted to safeguard the better interest of consumers. Consumer Protection Act is a benevolent and social legislation, the interest of the consumers would be protected so that they may get justice and relief. So under these circumstances, it is fair, just and proper to direct the LIC of India to settle the claim of the complainant after submission of the original policy bond by the complainant. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:- <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> 5. The complaint is allowed. The opposite parties are directed to settle the claim and pay the maturity value along with bonus of the policy No.839322979 as per law on production of original policy bond by the complainant. The opposite parties are directed settle the matter within 30 days from the date of submission of original policy bond by the complainant.<br /> 6. Send the copy of this Order to both the parties free of costs immediately. <br /> <br /> 7. Pronounced in the Open Forum on this 12TH DAY OF JUNE 2008. <br /> <br /> Order accordingly,<br /> <br /> PRESIDENT<br /> We concur the above findings. <br /> <br /> MEMBER MEMBER <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />