DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,<br /> BATHINDA (PUNJAB)<br /> <br /> CC No. 140 of 30-05-2007<br /> Decided on :31-10-2007 <br /> <br /> 1.Smt. Pritam Kaur aged about 52 years widow of Yadwinder Singh Bahia S/o Harbhachan Singh, R/o House. No. 16291, Guru Gobind Singh Nagar, Bathinda.<br /> 2.Samson Bahia aged about 30 years S/o Yadwinder Singh Bahia S/o Harbhajan Singh, R/o House No. 16291, Guru Gobind Singh Nagar, Bathinda.<br /> <br /> ... Complainants<br /> Versus<br /> 1.ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Branch Office, SCO No. 214, IInd Floor Sector 14, Panchkula Haryana, through its Branch Incharge.<br /> 2.The Bathinda Central Co-op. Bank Limited, Branch Office, Balluana District Bathinda through its Branch Manager.<br /> <br /> ... Opposite parties<br /> <br /> Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection<br /> Act, 1986.<br /> <br /> QUORUM :<br /> Sh. Lakhbir Singh, President<br /> Sh. Hira Lal Kumar, Member <br /> Dr. Phulinder Preet, Member<br /> <br /> For the Complainants : Sh. Mithu Ram Gupta, Advocate.<br /> For the Opposite parties : Sh. Vinod Garg, Advocate, for opposite party No.1 <br /> Opposite party No. 2 exparte.<br /> <br /> O R D E R <br /> <br /> LAKHBIR SINGH, PRESIDENT <br /> 1. Instant one is a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Here-in-after referred to as 'Act') which has been preferred by the complainants seeking direction from this Forum to the opposite parties to pay him claim amount of Rs. 1.00 Lac alongwith interest @ 18% P.A. w.e.f. 17.2.06 till realisation; Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for mental tension, agony and harassment and cost of the complaint.<br /> 2. Version of the complainants may be stated as under :-<br /> Complainants No. 1 & 2 are the widow and son respectively of Yadwinder Singh Bahia S/o Harbachan Singh, R/o House No. 16291, Guru Gobind Singh Nagar, Bathinda. He was Manager in Central Co-operative Bank, Balluana and was having Bank A/c No. 658 in opposite party No. 2. He had made complainant No. 1 as his nominee. Opposite party No. 2 purchased Policy to cover the risk of Rs. 1.00 Lac of its account holders under SBBY scheme under Group Personal Accident Insurance Policy. As per terms and conditions of the policy, opposite party No. 1 had covered the accidental risk of the account holders including Yadwinder Singh. On 1.5.06 at about 8/9 p.m. Yadwinder Singh alongwith his son and son-in-law were on evening walk at Lake No.2, Thermal Plant, Bathinda. While walking inside the iron angles on the periphery of lake, suddenly foot of Yadwinder singh slipped and he fell into the lake. His son-in-law also jumped into the lake to save him, but in vain. Sahara Welfare Volunteers were called. Dead body of Yadwinder Singh was taken out from the water of the lake. It was taken to Civil Hospital, Bathinda where Doctors declared him dead. DDR No. 4 dated 2.5.06 was recorded. Proceedings under Section 174 Cr.P.C. were conducted by the concerned officials of Police Station, Thermal Bathinda on the statement of complainant No. 2. Claim was lodged with opposite party No. 1 through opposite party No. 2 which sent it to opposite party No. 1. They (complainants) continued requesting the opposite parties to pay them the claim amount. All the documents were furnished to the opposite parties. With ulterior motive, claim has been repudiated alleging that Yadwinder Singh had committed suicide. It is asserted by them that death had occurred due to accident i.e. on account of slipping of the foot and falling into the lake. Act and conduct of the opposite parties have caused them mental tension, agony and harassment.<br /> 3. On being put to notice, opposite party No. 1 filed reply stating that Policy No. 4005/0003960 covering death solely and directly from accident was issued. Death caused by suicide is not covered under the policy. Matter was got thoroughly investigated through Sh. Satish Kumar Bansal, Investigator. As per his Investigation, deceased did not die due to accident. Rather he had committed suicide by way of jumping into the lake. Another claim under Personal Accident Insurance Policy with Oriental Insurance Company Limited, Bathinda was investigated by another surveyor and loss assessor i.e. Mr. Dinesh Kumar Goyal, who also came to the conclusion that it is a case of suicide and not a case of accidental death. Complicated questions of law and facts are involved which require voluminous evidence which can be taken in civil court. Complainants have concealed material facts and documents and have distorted the true facts. Complainants have no locus standi and cause of action to file the complaint and it is not maintainable in the present form. It denies that Yadwinder Singh alongwith his son and son-in-law were on evening walk at lake no. 2 on 1.5.06 at 8/9 p.m. and were walking inside the Iron Angles in the Periphery of lake and that deceased had fallen into the lake due to the slipping of his foot and that his son in law had jumped into the lake to save him. It denies that Sahara Welfare Volunteers were called by complainant 2 or Rajwant Singh, Son-in-law of deceased. Complainant No. 2 and Rajwant Singh did not accompany the dead body to civil hospital, Bathinda. Inter-alia its plea is that deceased was TB patient. He was getting treatment under DOTS system of medicines. He was a habitual drinker, suffering from mental tension and was on leave from his duty since long. He committed suicide by jumping into the lake. Some unknown persons called Sahara Welfare Organisation and deceased was taken out of the lake by Sahara Volunteers. Dead body was brought in Civil Hospital, Bathinda as of unknown person by one Mr. Jagga of Sahara Welfare Organisation. He was deposited as unknown in Civil Hospital because none of the relatives/legal heirs was present including the complainants or Rajwant Singh. No proceedings were recorded by Police from 12.40 a.m. on 2.5.06 till 3.30 a.m. as legal heirs were not present till that time. Complainants have concocted false story. It denies the remaining averments in the complaint.<br /> 4. Registered A.D. post notice was sent to opposite party No. 2 on 6.6.07. Neither registered cover nor A.D. was received back till 9.7.07. Accordingly, opposite party No. 2 has been deemed to have duly served. No-one came on its behalf. Accordingly, it has been proceeded against exparte.<br /> 5. In support of their averments contained in the complaint, complainants have produced in evidence affidavit of complainant No. 1 (Ex. C-1), photocopy of DDR No. 4 dated 2.5.06 (Ex. C-2), photocopy of Form No. 25-35(i) having two pages (Ex. C-3), photocopy of application dated 2.5.06 (Ex. C-4), photocopy of verification report (Ex. C-5), photocopy of Pass Book (Ex. C-6), photocopy of Certificate of Bank (Ex. C-7), photocopy of letter dated 28.3.07 (Ex. C-8), photocopy of death certificate of Yadwinder Singh (Ex. C-9), photocopy of Post Mortem Report (Ex. C-10), photocopy of cutting of news paper (Ex. C-11) and letter No. 4281 dated 6.8.07 (Ex. C-12).<br /> 6. In rebuttal, on behalf of opposite party No. 1, affidavit of Sh. Sat Praksh Area Had Channels & Authorised Signatory (Ex. R-1), photocopy of letter dated 14.12.06 (Ex. R-2), photocopy of letter dated 5.12.06 (Ex. R-3), affidavit of Sh. Satish Kumar Bansal, Investigator (Ex. R-4), photocopy of Investigation report (Ex. R-5), photocopy of statement of Baljit Kaur (Ex. R-6), photocopy of statement of Sh. Pawan Bansal (Ex. R-7), photocopies of DDRs No. 27 & 25 (Ex. R-8 and Ex. R-9), photocopies of photographs (Ex. R-10 to Ex. R-16), photocopy of letter dated 1.5.06 (Ex. R-7), photocopies of bills (Ex. R-18 and Ex. R-19), photocopies of OPD slips (Ex. R-20 to Ex. R-23), photocopy of Card (Ex. R-24), photocopies of cover notes (Ex. R-25 & Ex. R-26), photocopies of policy schedule (Ex. R-27 & Ex. R-28), photocopies of insurance cover notes (Ex. R-29 & Ex. R-30), photocopy of insurance policy with terms and conditions (Ex. R-31) , photocopy of letter dated 30.10.06 (Ex. R-32) and another affidavit of Sh. Sat Prakash, Area Head Channels (Ex. R-33) have been tendered in evidence.<br /> 7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. Besides this, we have gone through the record and written briefs of arguments submitted on behalf of complainant and opposite party No. 1.<br /> 8. Some are the undisputed facts. They are that opposite party No. 2 had purchased Group Personal Accident Insurance Policy for its account holders under SBBY scheme. Yadwinder Singh who was employee of opposite party No. 2 was also covered under the policy. Copy of the policy is Ex. R-31. In case of death, risk covered was of Rs. 1.00 Lac. Insurance was valid from 1.6.05 to 31.5.06. Yadwinder Singh has died. Claim was submitted. It has been repudiated as is evident from Ex. R-2 by holding that on investigation it has been found that deceased had committed suicide by jumping into the lake.<br /> 9. Mr. Gupta, learned counsel for the complainants argued that Ex. C-1 & Ex. C-13 are the affidavits of Pritam Kaur, wife and Samson Bahia, son of the deceased respectively and they have reiterated the version in the complaint. DDR No. 4 dated 2.5.06, copy of which is Ex. C-2, was recorded in Police Station, Thermal Bathinda, on the basis of the statement of Samson son of the deceased. This report also supports the stance of the complainants. Copy of the news paper clipping Ex. C-11 also supports the plea of the complainants that death was accidental and not suicidal.<br /> 10. Mr. Garg, learned counsel for opposite party No. 1 argued that ample evidence on the record proves that deceased committed suicide and his death was not accidental. Claim has been rightly repudiated on the basis of Investigation Report of Sh. Satish Kumar Bansal. There are other facts and circumstances as well which establish that death was not accidental and that it was suicidal.<br /> 11. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the rival arguments.<br /> 12. Burden of proving the deficiency in service is upon the person who alleges it as has been held in the case of Ravneet Singh Bagga Vs. KLM Royal Dutch Airlines 2000(1) CLT 33. Facts and surrounding circumstances of this case concerning the death of Yadwinder Singh are such in which Doctrine of res ipsa loquitur has to be kept in view. For this, we get support from the observations of their Lordships of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of The Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Jaipur Vs. Narain Shanker and another etc, etc., AIR 1980 Supreme Court 695.<br /> 13. Ex. R-24 is the copy of the card issued by District T.B. Control Society Bathinda Punjab dated 20.3.06. According to this document deceased was suffering from T.B. He was purchasing medicines as is evident from Ex. R-18 & Ex. R-19. There are other prescription slips of Civil Hospital, Bathinda, concerning the deceased which are Ex. R-20 to Ex. R-23. From this record, it becomes clear that deceased was suffering from TB and was getting medicines. Question is as to whether story set up by the complainants concerning the death of Yadwinder Singh is worth placing credence ? The reply to our minds is in the negative. Ex. R-10 to Ex. R-16 are the copies of the photographs of the lake. They reveal that lake is surrounded by Iron Grills. There is no provision of light. It does not sound to reason that at about 9/10 p.m. deceased alongwith is son and son-in-law could go at that place from Guru Gobind Singh Nagar, Bathinda, for evening walk in the Periphery of Lake. Version of the complainants that son of the deceased namely Samson and his son-in-law were accompanying him does not appeal to reason at all. Ex. R-17 is the copy of the letter sent by Emergency Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Bathinda to S.H.O. Civil Hospital, Bathinda, according to which body of Yadwinder Singh was brought by Jagga of Sahara Jan Sewa. If Samson and Rajwant Singh were accompanying the deceased and he had fallen into the lake in their presence, they must have come with the body of Yadwinder Singh to Civil Hospital, Bathinda where it was brought by Jagga of Sahara Jan Sewa. In this case, investigation was got conducted by opposite party No. 1 from Satish Kumar Bansal and copy of his Investigation Report is Ex. R-5. His affidavit is Ex. R-4. According to his investigation Yadwinder Singh Bahia had committed suicide by jumping into lake No. 2 on 1.5.06 and that he did not die due to accident. As per observations of the Hon'ble National Commission in the case of Paam Eatables Limited Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. 2004(3) CLT 163 and United India Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Jadhav Kirana Stores 2005(3) CLT 644 , report of surveyor is an important document and sufficient reason must be shown to reject it. In the absence of anything to the contrary, surveyor 's report is to be accepted. During the investigation, Investigator wrote letter, copy of which is Ex. R-32 to the President of Sahara Jan Sewa (Regd.) Bathinda, to know if any body known to Yadwinder Singh was there for his identification when the dead body was taken out by his employees from the lake or he was identified later on at Civil Hospital. Sh. Vijay Goyal, President of Sahara Jan Sewa gave in writing that dead body was taken out of the lake and was brought to Civil Hsopital, Bathinda, where person was declared dead. After that when his legal heirs came to know, further proceedings were initiated. This report of the President further reveals that story of the complainants that son of the deceased and his son-in-law were with him at the lake and that he had fallen in the lake due to the slipping of his foot is unfounded and baseless. Ex. R-9 is the copy of DDR No. 25 dated 2.5.06 recorded in Police Station, Thermal, Bathinda at 12.50 a.m. According to it, S.I. Surjan Singh and other officials came from Police Station. Ex. R-8 is the copy of DDR No. 27 of Police Station, Thermal, Bathinda, recorded at 3.30 A.M. on 2.5.06. A perusal of this document shows that Surjan Singh and other officials came back from Civil Hospital, Bathinda. He could not initiate any action regarding the death of Yadwinder Singh on account of the fact that no legal heir of the deceased came in Civil Hospital nor was present there. He further recorded that proceedings would be taken up after their arrival. From Ex. R-9 & Ex. R-8, it is evident that from 12.50 a.m. to 3.30 a.m. on 2.5.06, no legal heir of the deceased was with his dead body brought by Jagga to Civil Hospital. This further belies the plea of complainant No. 1 and her son in the affidavits Ex. C-1 & Ex. C-13 and in the complaint which is to the effect that samson and Rajwant Singh were accompanying the deceased. Not to speak of this, investigator recorded the statement of Smt. Baljit Kaur Ex. Municipal Councillor , Bathinda during the investigation which supports the story of opposite party No. 1. Complainant No. 1 is serving as primary teacher in the Ward in which Smt. Baljit Kaur was elected Municipal Councillor. According to her statement, Yadwinder Singh was sick since long and he had left the house without any information. When members of his family started his search and reached near lake, they had come to know that Volunteers of Sahara Welfare had taken dead body of one Sikh Gentleman to Civil Hospital, Bathinda and on that account, members of his family had reached Civil Hospital, Bathinda. This statement gives jolt to the stance of the complainants. Mr. Satish Kumar Bansal, Investigator also recorded the statement of Pawan Bansal as well, copy of which is Ex. R-7. According to it, Yadwinder Singh was liquor addict. He was not stopping consuming liquor despite the advice of doctor. There used to be quarrel on this issue On 1.5.06, he had met him at about 7.00 p.m. He was bare headed and was wearing chappals only. Thereafter he came to know that he had died due to drowning in the lake. Claim regarding another policy was got investigated by Oriental Insurance Company Limited from Sh. Harjit Singh, I.P.S Superintendent of Police (Retd.). He submitted his report. On the basis of his report, claim regarding Insurance Policy concerning Yadwinder Singh was repudiated by Oriental Insurance Company Limited vide letter dated 5.12.06 addressed to complainant No. 1, copy of which is Ex. R-3 by holding that Yadwinder Singh had committed suicide. Facts and circumstances clearly show that the death of Yadwinder Singh was not due to accident. Rather he committed suicide by jumping into the lake. We are of the view that affidavits Ex. C-1 & Ex. C-13 are not worth placing reliance. Complainants have failed to give solid reasons on the basis of which Investigation report and affidavit of Sh. Satish Kumar Bansal, Investigator, can be rejected. So far as documents Ex. C-2 to Ex. C-5 and Ex. C-11 are concerned, they came to light subsequent to the time documents Ex. R-8 and Ex. R-9 came into existence. On the basis of Ex. R-8, Ex. R-9, Ex. R-32 and other facts and circumstances discussed above, we have no hesitation in concluding that version in Ex. C-2 got recorded by Samson and the factum recorded that deceased had slipped into the lake is an after thought.<br /> 14. As a result of our foregoing discussion, crux of the matter is that Insurance claim regarding the death of Yadwinder Singh, deceased has rightly been repudiated by opposite party No. 1. Accordingly, repudiation of the claim is sustained. Since no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties is established, complaint is meritless. Accordingly, it is dismissed. In the facts and circumstances, parties are left to bear their own costs. Copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned and file be consigned to record room. <br /> Pronounced :<br /> 31-10--2007 <br /> (Lakhbir Singh )<br /> President <br /> <br /> (Dr.Phulinder Preet) (Hira Lal Kumar )<br /> Member Member<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />