DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,<br /> BATHINDA (PUNJAB)<br /> <br /> CC. No. 208 of 08-08-2008<br /> Decided on : 31-03-2009 <br /> <br /> Urmila Rani widow of Sham Lal C/o M/s. Des Raj Sham Lal Commission Agetns, Maur Mandi, District Bathinda. ... Complainant<br /> Versus<br /> <br /> 1.Life Insurance Corporation of India through its Senior Divisional Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India, Divisional Office, Urban Estate, Phase-I, Dugri, Ludhiana.<br /> 2.Branch Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India, Near PWD Office, Bus Stand Road, Rampura Phul. <br /> ... Opposite parties<br /> <br /> Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection<br /> Act, 1986.<br /> <br /> QUORUM <br /> <br /> Sh. Pritam Singh Dhanoa, President<br /> Dr.Phulinder Preet, Member<br /> Sh. Amarjeet Paul, Member<br /> <br /> Present : Sh. Abhey Singla, Advocate, counsel for the complainant<br /> Sh. Inderjit Singh, Advocate, counsel for the opposite parties<br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> SH. PRITAM SINGH DHANOA, PRESIDENT<br /> 1. This complaint has been filed by Smt. Urmila Rani widow of Sh. Sham Lal under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short called the 'Act') against Life Insurance Corporation of India through its Senior Divisional Manager, Ludhiana and Branch Manager, Rampura Phul, District Bathinda, for giving direction to them to release the amount of claim against the Insurance policies issued in the name of Sh. Sham Lal son of Sh. Des Raj with further direction to pay compensation in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- for mental tension and harassment suffered by the complainant and costs in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- incurred by her in filing of the complaint or any other additional or alternative relief deemed fit by this Forum, in the facts and circumstances of the case.<br /> 2. In nutshell, the case of the complaint as projected in the complaint is that deceased husband of the complaint secured under mentioned Insurance policies covering the risk of his life for the period of 20 years from the date of their issue :-<br /> Sl. No. Policy Number Sum Insured <br /> 1. 10460428 Rs. 1,00,000/-<br /> 2. 160461021 Rs. 50,000/-<br /> 3. 160462287 Rs. 1,50,000/-<br /> These policies were issued by Mansa Branch of the opposite parties but after opening of their Branch at Rampura Phul, policies were transferred to the said branch. The deceased insured has nominated the complainant as nominee to receive the claim in case of his death. He expired on 14.07.2007, after which the complainant lodged claim with Mansa Branch and Rampura Phul Branch, of the opposite parties and sent all the requisite documents including death certificate, Form No. 3783-R and Insurance policies to enable the opposite parties to settle her claim. The amount payable under two more policies secured by deceased husband of the complainant bearing No. 160360430 and 160150749 was paid by Mansa Branch in the sum of Rs. 97,387/- and Rs. 76,881/- respectively, but they have not settled the claim under the policies mentioned at serial numbers 1 to 3 above. Instead of doing so, they sent letters dated 11-09-2007 and 10-12-2007 to the complainant to submit discharge form, original policy bond and her bank account although those documents have already been submitted to them. Since the opposite parties have failed to make the payment of amount payable under the policies in question, as such, complainant has been subjected to mental and physical agony and had to spent huge amount for filing the complaint. Hence, the complaint.<br /> 3. On being put to notice, opposite parties filed written version resisting the complaint by taking preliminary objections; that complaint is not maintainable; that complainant has no locus standi and cause of action to file the complaint and she has not approached this Forum with clean hands as she has mis-represented the facts and has failed to submit the requisite documents inspite of reminders sent to her vide letter written on 11-09-2007, 05-10-2007, 10-12-2007 and 10-01-2008 and to complete other requisite formalities; that neither there is deficiency in service nor unfair trade practice has been adopted by the opposite parties; that this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain and try the complaint which being false and vexatious is liable to be dismissed. On merits, the factum of issuance of the policies and lodging claims by the complainant after demise of her husband on 14-07-2007, is not disputed but it is reiterated that after receipt of intimation about the death of her husband from the complainant on 09-08-2007, liability of the Insurance company was booked on even date but she failed to complete the formalities and to submit the requisite documents inspite of above said notices served upon her, as such, her claim could not be finalised. Rest of averments made in the complaint have been denied and prayer has been made for dismissal of the same, with costs. <br /> 4. On being called upon, by this Forum, to do so, the learned counsel for the complainant tendered affidavit of Urmial Rani, complainant and copies of documents Ex. C-2 to Ex. C-19, before he closed her evidence. On other hand, learned counsel for the opposite parties tendered in evidence affidavit of Sh. J P Arya, Manager (Legal & HPF) Ex. R-1 and copies of documents Ex. R-2 to Ex. R-7, and he closed their evidence. <br /> 5. We have heard, the learned counsel for the parties and perused the oral and documentary evidence adduced on record by them, carefully, with their kind assistance.<br /> 6. Learned counsel for the complainant Sh. Abhey Singla, Advocate, has submitted, at the out set, that as per documents brought on record by the complainant, the opposite parties have honoured the claim for death of her husband payable under the 2 Insurance policies but they have failed to pay the amount due against the policies under reference despite production of all the requisite documents for a considerable time before filing of instant complaint because of which complainant has suffered mental and physical agony. Learned counsel argued that non-settlement of claim for a considerable time by the opposite parties, amounts to deficiency in service and complainant is liable to seek compensation for physical and mental harassment and costs incurred by him for filing of instant complaint.<br /> 7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite parties Sh. Inderjit Singh, Advocate, has submitted that claim under the policies in question cannot be settled by the opposite parties because complainant has failed to submit the requisite documents and to complete the formalities, as such she cannot take benefit of her own omission and it cannot be concluded that there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties for which they be directed to pay compensation and costs incurred by the complainant. Learned counsel urged that complaint being false and vexatious, deserves to be dismissed with compensatory costs.<br /> 8. The complainant has herself produced on record copies of letters dated 10-12-2007 Ex. C-10 to Ex. C-12, written by the opposite parties requesting her to deliver original Insurance policies in her possession and to disclose her bank account number, to enable them to consider her claim with further direction to execute the discharge form and to comply with other formalities required for the purpose. Even she has been directed to take assistance of the officials of the opposite parties if she needs any guidance for the said purpose. Since the documents have been tendered in evidence by the complainant, therefore, they cannot be ignored. The opposite parties have also produced on record the copy of notice sent by the claimant conveying intimation about the factum of her deceased husband and copy of death certificate Ex. R-2 attached with the same. They have further produced on record copies of notices dated 09-08-2007 Ex. R-4 to Ex. R-6, acknowledging the receipt of intimation about the death of her husband from the complainant and with the request to her to execute Forms No. 3783A, 84,85 and 87 and to send them original policy documents, any deed in case of any assignment, certified extract from Municipal register as proof of death of her husband, proof of age of the insured, discharge form duly filled in by her as nominee of the insured and Forms No. 3806 and 3807 duly completed. The complainant has not produced on record any proof of above said documents sent, sought to be produced by the opposite parties. The mere fact that the claims against the remaining policies mentioned in the complaint has been honoured by the opposite parties, does not mean that she has complied the requisite documents and completed the formalities for honouring the claim.<br /> 9. In the light of our above discussion, we have come to the conclusion that complainant cannot be said to have been subjected to mental and physical agony due to delay in honouring her claim. The complainant cannot take advantage of her own omission to furnish the requisite documents and complete requisite formalities required for honouring the claim inspite of receipt of notices from the opposite parties. However, as the opposite parties have not repudiated the claim lodged by the complaint, as such, they cannot be absolved of making payment of amount due against the policies in question and secured by the deceased husband of the complainant covering risk of his life and complainant, who is admittedly appointed nominee by her deceased husband, is entitled to receive the amount payable under the policies especially when the opposite parties have not taken any plea that the claim is not payable as per terms and conditions of the policy or for any other technical reason.<br /> 10. For the aforesaid reasons, we partly accept the complaint and direct the opposite parties to make payment to the complainant against Insurance Policies No. 160460428, 160461021 and 160462287, alongwith bonus as per the rules on the subject, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order provided that complainant furnishes the requisite documents and complete the formalities for release of the amount, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. In case the opposite parties fail to settle the claim of the complainant under the policies in question within a stipulated period, they would be liable to pay interest at the rate of 9 percent per annum from the date of filing of complaint i.e. 08-08-2008 till the date of actual payment. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, parties are left to bear their own costs. The copies of this order be sent to the parties, free of costs as per rules, on the subject.<br /> File be indexed and consigned. <br /> Pronounced : <br /> 31-03-2009 (Pritam Singh Dhanoa)<br /> President<br /> <br /> <br /> (Dr. Phulinder Preet)<br /> Member <br /> <br /> (Amarjeet Paul ) <br /> Member