BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PATIALA. Complaint No.CC/10/ 270 of 13.4.2010 Decided on: 23.8.2011 Balwinder Singh S/o Late Sh.Surjit Singh R/o Village Gajju Majra, District Patiala. -----------Complainant Versus 1. Iffco-Tokio General Insurance Co.Ltd.,Customer Service Centre North, Iffco House,3rd Floor, 34 Nehru Place, New Delhi 110019, through its Head. 2. Iffco-Tokio Insurance Co.Ltd.,SCO 65, 2nd Floor, New Leela Bhavan, Patiala through its Area Manager ----------Opposite parties. 3. The Patiala Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Mall Road, Patiala --------(Proforma party) Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act. QUORUM Sh.D.R.Arora, President Sh.Amarjit Singh Dhindsa, Member Smt.Neelam Gupta, Member Present: None ORDER D.R.ARORA, PRESIDENT Deceased Surjit Singh S/o Balvir Singh of whom the complainant is the son had been the holder of loan account no.440 under “Kiss an credit card scheme’ with the Patiala Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. i.e. op no.3 at its branch of village Gajju Majra and he was insured in a sum of Rs.50,000/- in case of accidental death by Iffco-Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd. i.e. op no.1 as per the agreement made between ops no.1&3 .The requisite premium for extending the insurance cover was being debited from the account of the deceased by op no.3 regularly and forwarded to op no.1. 2. The complainant is the beneficiary being a nominee of the deceased. The deceased had met with an accident in the area of village Khambi,Tehsil Hodal, District Palwal,Haryana and he died on 8.10.2008. 3. The complainant was approached by the officials of op no.3 and who advised him to file the claim application being the nominee of the deceased. They also provided the details of the documents required for the same. Accordingly the complainant moved the claim application with op no.3 alongwith requisite documents, who forwarded the same to op no.1 through op no.2 at Patiala vide letter no.11658. 4. Op no.1, however, repudiated the claim of the complainant vide letter dated 25.3.2010 stating that they had not received un used cheque book and bank pass book despite repeated reminders and that the complainant had not taken any interest in the claim and accordingly op no.1 closed the claim file as ‘no claim’. 5. It is further averred that the complainant again approached op no.3 who had again taken up the matter with the officials of ops no.1&2 so as to process the claim properly. The complainant approached op no.2 several times with a request to process the claim but to no effect. No communication either oral or in writing was ever received by the complainant except the aforesaid repudiation letter dated 25.3.2010 in which also the complainant was addressed as Balvir Singh s/o Surjit Singh, whereas the complainant is Balwinder Singh and his grand father’s name is Balvir Singh. Thus, describing the act of the ops in not settling his claim as a deficiency of service, the complainant approached this Forum through the present complaint brought under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act ( for short the Act) for a direction to the ops to pay him Rs.50,000/-, the amount of the claim with interest @18% per annum; to pay him Rs.25000/- by way of compensation for the harassment and the mental agony experienced by him at the hands of the ops and further to pay Rs.20,000/-as costs of the litigation. 6. On notice, ops no.1&2 appeared and filed their written version, whereas op no.3 was proceeded exparte. 7. In the written statement filed by the ops they have raised certain legal objections, interalia, that the complainant had no cause of action to file the complaint; that the complainant has not approached the Forum with clean hands as he suppressed the material facts; that intricate questions of facts and law are involved and therefore, the matter could not be determined under the summary procedure before the Forum; that the complainant is not a consumer and therefore, the Forum lacks jurisdiction to entertain and try the complaint; that the complainant is estopped in filing the complaint by his act,conduct omissions and acquiescence and that the complaint being false, frivolous and vexatious, the same is liable to be dismissed with penalty. As regards the facts of the complaint, it is denied that the deceased was the holder of the loan account no.440 under ‘Kisan credit scheme’ with op no.3 at its branch of village Gajjumajra and that the complainant be obliged to prove the said fact. It is however, averred by the ops that the claim of the complainant has been repudiated rightly. Before filing of the claim of the complainant, the ops had written two letters dated 27.1.2010 and 17.3.2010 requiring the complainant to submit the un used cheque book and bank pass book but he failed to submit the same and it was only thereafter that the claim was filed as ‘no claim’ having closed the file with the observations that the complainant was not interested to pursue his claim. After denouncing the other averments of the complaint, going against the ops, it was prayed to dismiss the complaint. 8. In support of his claim, the complainant produced in evidence his sworn affidavit,Ex.C1, alongwith the documents,Exs.C2 to C14 and his learned counsel closed the evidence. 9. On the other hand, on behalf of the ops, their learned counsel produced in evidence,Ex.R1, the sworn affidavit of
Rajeev Chowdhary, authorized signatory of op no.1 and the learned counsel for the ops closed their evidence. 10. The parties failed to file the written arguments. None having appeared on behalf of the parties we have examined the file qua the evidence led by the parties. 11. Ex.C2 is the copy of the Kisan Credit card in respect of the deceased Surjit Singh s/o Balvir Singh r/o village Gajjumajra to have been issued by op no.3. Ex.C3 is the copy of the statement of account in respect of account No.440 pertaining to the deceased Surjit Singh showing a sum of Rs.42252/- to be due against the account holder as on 3.9.2008. Ex.C4, is the copy of the register of the members of Sadarpur Multipurpose Co.Operative Society Ltd. at Gajjumajra, Tehsil and District Patiala, showing the deceased Surjit Singh to be a member entered at Sr.No.1149 . 12. Ex.C8, is the copy of letter dated 21.11.2008 to have been written by the Sr.Manager of op no.3 to the District Manager of op no.2 in respect of insurance scheme under personal accident insurance related to Kisan Credit Card of Surjit Singh s/o Balvir Singh resident of village and Post Office Gajju Majra, Tehsil and District Patiala, whereby the claim form duly completed and signed by the Branch Manager and counter signed by the beneficiary alongwith the other documents was sent, Ex.C9 being the copy of the personal accident insurance claimant’s statement, Ex.C10 being the copy of the death certificate of Surjit Singh, Ex.C11 being the copy of the FIR no. not legible dated 8.10.2008 lodged with P.S.Hassanpur District Faridabad (Haryana) and Exs.C12 and C13 being the copies of the postmortem examination report of the deceased. 13. Ex.C14 is the copy of the letter dated 25.3.2010 written by ops no.1&2 to one Balvir Singh S/o Surjit Singh R/o village Gajju Majra in respect of Janta Personal Policy claim under policy No.51090516 and claim no.510391180 having informed the addressee that they had not received the un used cheque book and bank pass book and therefore, they were closing the claim file as ‘no claim’. 14. From the letter,Ex.C14, it would come out that the claim was lodged by the complainant under Janta Personal Policy No.51090516 and claim no.51039180 in respect of the deceased Surjit Singh but the same was repudiated because of the complainant having failed to submit the un used cheque book and bank pass book. 15. We really fail to understand as to how the settlement of the claim of the complainant in respect of the personal accident of the deceased Surjit Singh, a holder of loan account no.440 with op no.3 was dependent upon the submission of the cheque book and bank pass book held by the deceased because the claim was lodged by the Patiala Central Co-operative Ltd. itself on behalf of the complainant vide letter dated 21.11.2008( copy Ex.C8) and therefore, ops no.1&2 could ask for any information from op no.3. In any case, ops no.1&2 could inform op no.3 that the claim was settled subject to op no.3 getting the cheque book and pass book from the complainant. We find that the claim of the complainant has been repudiated by ops no.1&2 without any justifiable ground because the complainant was not under any obligation to submit the cheque book/pass book obtained by the deceased from op no.3 it was a prerogative of op no.3 to ask for the same from the complainant. We accordingly accept the claim and give a direction to ops no.1&2 to reimburse the claim of the complainant in respect of the payment of Rs.50,000/- under Janta Personal policy claim no.51090516 with interest @9% per annum from the date of the repudiation of the claim i.e. 25.3.2010 till the final payment. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we also award the complainant with compensation in a sum of Rs.10,000/- on account of the harassment and the mental agony experienced by the complainant at the hands of the ops and the said amount also includes the costs of the complaint. Pronounced. Dated:23.8.2011 Neelam Gupta Amarjit Singh Dhindsa D.R.Arora Member Member President
| | Smt. Neelam Gupta, Member | HONABLE MR. D.R.Arora, PRESIDENT | Mr. Amarjit Singh Dhindsa, Member | | 
