DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR

                                                                  Complaint no. 421                                                                                        

                                                                   Instituted on:    21.08.2017                                                                             

                                                                     Decided on:     13.12.2017

Neeru Mittal widow of Amit Kumar resident of Ward No.7, House No.120, Lehra, District Sangrur.         

                                                …. Complainant

                                        Versus

1.     H.D.F.C. Ergo General Insurance Company Limited 6th Floor, Leela Business Park, Andheri Kurla Road, Andheri East Mumbai, through its Managing Director.
2.   H.D.FC Ergo General Insurance Company Limited 6th Floor, MBC Tower, Old No.90 New Number 199, Luz Church Road, Mylapur Coi, Chennai, Tamilnadu through its Chairman.
3.   H.D.F.C. Ergo General Insurance Company Limited, Steelar I.T. Park, Tower-1 5th Floor C-25, Sector 52, Noida, through its Regional Manager.
4.   H.D.F.C. Ergo General Insurance Company Limited Choti Baradari, Patiala through its Branch Manager.

                                              ….Opposite parties

FOR THE COMPLAINANT      :     Shri Ashi Goyal Advocate                          

FOR THE OPP. PARTIES         :      Shri G.S.Shergill, Advocate

Quorum

                    Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

Sarita Garg, Member

Vinod Kumar Gulati, Member    

ORDER:  

Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

1.                 Neeru Mittal complainant has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that she took a Sarv Surksha policy  for a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- from OPs on 23.09.2013 and paid premium of Rs.787/- .  During the subsistence of the policy husband of the complainant met with an accident and died on 23.06.2015 . The complainant informed the OPs about death of her husband but till date no claim  was paid to her.  Thus, alleging unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs, the complainant has sought following reliefs:-

i)      OPs be directed to pay the insured amount of Rs.10,00,000/-  alongwith interest @18% per annum,

ii)     OPs be directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.55000/- as compensation   on account of mental agony, harassment,

iii)   OPs be directed to pay Rs.33000/- as litigation expenses.

2.             In reply filed by the OPs, it has been denied that husband of the complainant obtained the insurance policy from the OPs. It is also wrong that husband of the complainant was insured vide policy number 51666388. The complainant has not informed the OPs so when no intimation was given to the OPs then there is no occasion for the OPs to verify the genuineness  of the alleged accidental death of the husband of the complainant. Thus, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs.

3.             The complainant in his evidence has tendered documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-15 and closed evidence. On the other hand, OPs have tendered documents Ex.OP-1 and Ex.OP-2 and closed evidence.

4.             The OPs have specifically stated in their written statement that no intimation regarding the death of her husband was given by the complainant to the OPs. It has been further stated that  when  no intimation was given to the OPs then there was no occasion for the OPs to verify the genuineness of the alleged accidental death of husband of complainant.

5.             From the perusal of the file we find that the complainant has  not produced any document which could show that the complainant had given any intimation regarding the death of  her husband to the OPs but we find that the complainant has produced on record copy of legal notice dated 10.07.2017 Ex.C-11 and postal receipts Ex.C-12 to Ex.C-15 which prove that legal notice was duly served to the OPs but no reply to the legal notice was sent by the OPs. So, we feel that it has come to the notice/ acknowledge of the OPs regarding death of husband of the complainant   through legal notice Ex.C-11 but the OPs have not taken any step to settle the claim of the complainant till date nor demanded any document from the complainant to settle her claim. Hence, we feel that it would be better  if the complainant is directed to provide the required documents to the OPs for settlement of the claim.      

6.             For the reasons recorded above, we allow the complaint and direct the complainant to provide the required documents to the OPs for settlement of her claim within 15 days and after that the OPs will decide the claim case of the complainant within 30 day and convey the same to the complainant immediately. However the complainant will be at liberty to approach the Forum if not satisfied with the decision of the OPs. Copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of charge. File be consigned to records in due course.                   

                *Announced

                December 13, 2017

(Vinod Kumar Gulati) ( Sarita Garg)   (Sukhpal Singh Gill)                                                                                                                                                               

             Member            Member                         President