DATE OF FILING                    :      30-11-2012.

DATE OF S/R                            :      07-02-2013.

DATE OF FINAL ORDER      :     28-06-2013.

1.      Ratan Chandra Ghosh,

son of late Panchu Gopal Ghosh,

2.      Rekha Ghsoh,

wife of Ratan Chandra Ghosh,

3.      Sourav Ghosh,

son of Ratan Chandra Ghosh,

all are residing at Village – Mansadanga Ghoshpara,

P.S. Domjur,

District – Howrah.---------------------------------------------------  COMPLAINANTS.

-          Versus   -

Life Insurance Corporation of India,

Domjur Branch,

District – Howrah,

PIN - 711405. --------------------------------------------------------OPPOSITE PARTY.

                                                P   R    E     S    E    N     T

President     :     Shri T.K. Bhattacharya, M.A. LL.B. WBHJS.

Member      :      Shri P.K. Chatterjee.

Member       :     Smt. Jhumki Saha.

                                                 F  I   N   A    L       O   R   D    E     R

1.                  Brief facts of the case is that complainants purchased three policies from O.P.

for sum assured of Rs. 50,000/- each and the date of commencement of the three policies were on 14-03-2007 and 31-03-2007 on being assured of  getting double the amount  paid after five years by the agent of O.P. namely Dulal  Ch. Paul ( Agency Code No. 0061143 B ) since deceased.   Three policy documents were issued by the O.P. being numbered as 437998492, 437987381 & 437987382 vide Annexures 15, 16, 17 attached with the additional written version of the O.P. And the three policy documents have also been attached. But when the complainants came to know that those ‘money plus’ policies were not performing well as they were unit-linked policies and also depending on share market up and down situation, complainants approached the said agent of O.P.  to surrender those policies. Here again, the said agent convinced them to surrender those policies and  to purchase one fresh policy with the surrender value of Rs. 95,008/- arose from three policies. Not only that, complainants were also convinced to pay a further amount of Rs. 67,992/- in cash to purchase the fresh policy by the persuasive tongue of the said agent. And the total amount of Rs. 1,63,000/- ( Rs. 95,008 + Rs. 67,992) was deposited through one another CLIA agent of O.P. having Code no. 0255543B, namely, Ashis Paul, for which two receipts were issued, one as first premium receipt and another as advance premium receipt both dated as 28-08-2011 for the amounts of Rs. 37,443/- and Rs. 1,25,557/- respectively vide Annexure money receipts having serial nos. 6158 and 6156 respectively. But on 26-03-2012, Dulal Chandra Paul expired and the complainants went to the office of the O.P. on 28-03-2012 and the higher officials of O.P. told them that the receipt showing the deposit of Rs. 1,25,557/- is not genuine being serial no. 6156. So, the complainants also thought that one fresh policy document, which was issued by the O.P. for an amount of Rs. 37,443/- being no. 496382962, was also not genuine. Thereafter, the complainant wrote many letters to the different higher authorities of O.P. and also wrote letter for information vide Annexures 12, 13, 14 to Domjur P.S. on 20-09-2012. On receiving letters from the complainant no. 1, Assistant Secretary of O.P.’s higher authority sent one letter  on 16-05-2012 and one another letter reached from Manager, C R M, Howrah Divisional Office on 27-06-2012 with the same assurance that investigation is going on in respect of his complaint and they would give him satisfactory reply very shortly vide Annexures 10 & 11. But till the filing of this case on 30-11-2012, no satisfactory reply reached the complainants. Finding no other alternative and being aggrieved, alleging deficiency in service, complainants filed this instant case praying  for a direction to be given upon the O.P. to issue the original policy document being no. 496382962 or to return the entire amount with due interest and to pay an amount of  Rs. 1,00,000/- as compensation along with a litigation cost and other reliefs.       

2.                  Notices were served. O.p. appeared and filed written version as well as

additional written version.

3.                  Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination :

i)          Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.  ?

ii)                  Whether the complainants are   entitled to get any relief as prayed for ? 

DECISION  WITH   REASONS      :

4.                  Both the points are  taken up together for consideration.            We have carefully

gone through the contents of written version and additional written version along with all documents and annexures. It is the specific plea of the O.P. that they have never received an amount of Rs. 1,25,557/- in total from the complainant. For three surrendered policies, the surrender value came to  Rs. 95,008/-. Out of which one fresh policy was issued by them being no. 496382962 for an annual premium of  Rs. 37,443/- in the name of complainant no. 1 being Ratan Ghosh and the surrender value of earlier policy of Ratan Ghosh was Rs. 37,720/-. So, an amount of Rs. 277/- was reimbursed to him through an account payee cheque being no. 011768 drawn on AXIS Bank but it was refused by him. And for other two complainants, two cheques were also issued for the amount of Rs. 19,174/- and Rs. 38,114/- in favour of complainant nos. 3 and 2 respectively but all three cheques were not encashed by the complainants. And even after appearing in this case, O.P. revalidated the cheques and three cheques for the amounts of Rs. 19,174/- being ;no. 011766, Rs. 277/- being no. 011768 and Rs. 38,114/- being no. 011767 all dated 22-02-2013 were drawn in favour of the complainants and placed before this Forum. But complainants refused to accept those as their total amount of Rs. 1,63,000/- could not be covered up. But O.P. submitted repeatedly that they have no knowledge of receiving the amount of Rs. 67,992/- in cash from the complainant. And O.P. has also acknowledged that the receipt being no. 6156 for an amount of Rs. 1,25,557/- is a fake one and as that was given by the agents, whether it was by Dulal  Ch. Paul, since deceased or Ashis Paul, the liability cannot be cast upon O.P. as O.P. never received any amount of Rs. 67,992/-. But here  we are  to consider that O.P. admitted those two persons as its agents and it is an approved principle of law that for the acts of the agents, principal  should be made liable. And the appearance of both the money receipts dated 28-08-2011 are so much identical that  common people would never doubt about those receipts.  Further, when at the office of the O.P. on 28-03-2012, complainant placed both the receipts before the higher officials and O.P. opined that the receipt being 6156 is not a genuine one, did O.P. lodge any  F.I.R. against the concerned agent on agents ?  Whether any criminal case was started against them ? No. At least no such document has been filed by O.P. in this case. It is the agent who appears before the common people and makes them understand the utility and usefulness of purchasing an insurance policy. Certainly, people are to believe the agents and act on their assurances. How the common people would learn to verify a money receipt about its genuinety when it is bearing the logo of the O.P. itself. Moreover, it is the stated principle of law that it is he to prove who asserts, when O.P. has claimed the money receipt dated 28-08-2011 being no. 6156 for the amount of Rs. 1,25,557/- to be a fake one, did they apply before the  Forum praying for a direction upon the agent, at least on Ashis Paul, who is still alive, to be present before this Forum and tell about this fake money receipt ? No. So, for the cash amount of  Rs. 67,992/- which was paid in cash by the complainants, the entire liability vests upon O.P. as on behalf of O.P., its agents did all these.  And the complainants have been praying before O.P. for proper redressal since 28-03-2012. But all their efforts went in vain. It is nothing but gross negligence of O.P. towards the complainants. And the O.P. is found to be deficient in providing service. So, the case succeeds on merit with cost against O.P.

      Points under consideration are accordingly decided.

      Hence,

                                    O     R     D      E      R      E        D

      That the C. C. Case No.  157 of 2012 ( HDF 157 of 2012 )  be  allowed on contest with  costs  against  the O.P. 

      That the  O.P. is directed to issue original policy certificate being  no. 496382962 for the premium received Rs. 37,443/- dated 28-08-2011 within one month from this order, i.d., Rs. 50/-  per day shall be imposed till actual receipt of the same by the complainant.

      That the o.p. is  further directed to return the amount of Rs. 1,25,557/- ( Rs. 38,114+ Rs. 19,174/- + Rs. 277/- + Rs. 67,992/- )  to the complainant.

      The complainants do get an award of Rs. 15,000/- as compensation and Rs. 5,000/- as litigation cost.

      The O.P. is directed to comply the order in toto within one month from the date of this order, i.d., the entire amount of Rs. 1,45,557/- shall carry an interest @ 10% p.a. till full realization.

      The complainant is at liberty to put the decree into execution after expiry of the appeal period.

      Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.            

DICTATED  &    CORRECTED

BY   ME.  

      (  Jhumki Saha  )                                                                  

  Member, C.D.R.F.,Howrah.

 ( Jhumki Saha )                         ( P. K. Chatterjee )                (T.K. Bhattacharya  )

 Member,                                     Member,                                President,

 C.D.R.F.,Howrah.                     C.D.R.F.,Howrah.                 C.D.R.F.,Howrah                                      

                                          .