:    J U D G M E N T    :

This is a case under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 filed by Malashree Roy against Branch Manager, LIC of India, Krishnagar Branch – 1, P.O. Krishnagar, Dist. Nadia.

 The facts of the case to put in a nutshell, are as below:- 

The complainant purchased an insurance policy from the LICI, table 75 for the term 20 years (vide policy No. 422179852) on 27.03.2000.  The annual premium was fixed at Rs. 1,655/- yearly.   The complainant received the first money back amount Rs. 5,000/- on 27.03.2005, but the second money back amount of Rs. 5,000/- did not get in the year 2010.  The complainant went to the office of the OP on 05.04.13 to know the fate of the 2^nd money back amount.  There he came to know that the OP already issued a cheque vide No. 0274856 on 27.03.2010.  Thereafter, he informed the matter to customer zone on 06^th May, 2014 but no response has yet to come.  The cause of action arose on and from 05.04.2013. Finding no other alternative the complainant has filed this case praying for Rs. 5,000/- as money back amount plus interest and Rs. 10,000/- as compensation and cost. 

OP, LICI files written version on 05.12.14 denying all the allegations made by the complainant.  The sum and substance of the written version is stated below:-

The case is not maintainable and the complainant has no cause of action to file this case.  The present complaint is misconceived, malafide and motivated. The case is bad for defect of parties. 

OP admitted that the complainant purchased a money back policy being No. 422179852 on 27.03.2010.  The amount claimed by the complainant was already been paid by cheque on 27.03.2010 amounting to Rs. 5,000/- so the complainant has no claimed amount.  Thus, the complainant is not entitled to get any amount the case should be rejected with cost.

POINTS FOR DECISION

1. Point No. 1:   Is the complainant a consumer?
2. Point No. 2:   Has OP negligently operated upon the complainant?
3. Point No. 3:   What relief the complainant is entitled to get?

REASOND DECISIONS

            For the purpose of brevity and convenience all the points are taken up together for discussion.

            It is admitted position that the complainant is a consumer.

            Now, regarding negligence we have perused the written version, statement of account given by the bank and other documents along with the documents we find that Rs. 5,000/- was credited by SBI, Krishnagar from LICI (vide the deposition of Samir Kr. Das, SBI, employee dtd.  07.12.15).

            Thus, the oral and written argument advanced by Ld. Advocate on 11.01.16 does not hold much water.  Thus, we are also inclined to hold that the Annexure – 1 to 4 does not justify anymore payment from LICI.  Hence, all the points are disposed of with the observation that the OP is not a stage of negligence as the amount of Rs. 5,000/- was credited in the SB Account of the complainant (vide statement of account).

            The case is thus, disposed of without cost and without any relief to the complainant.

Hence,

Ordered,

That, the case CC/2014/99 be and the same is dismissed on contest. No cost.

Let a copy of this judgment be delivered to the parties free of cost.