Order by:

Sh.Amrinder Singh Sidhu,  President.

1.       The  complainant  has filed the instant complaint under section 12 of  the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (as amended upto date) on the allegations that she purchased policy bearing No.132313983 dated 28.12.2006 from the Opposite Parties and said policy is with the profits and DAB. The premium of the policy was regularly paid since the year 2014-2015 and lastly premium of Rs.6,387/- has duly been paid on 28.01.2019 which was duly confirmed by the Opposite Parties. The Complainant alleges that said policy was due on 28.12.2016 with survival benefits of Rs.20,000/- and the Complainant accordingly approached the Opposite Parties, but the Opposite Parties wrongly credited the said amount in some another account, but despite repeated requests and reminders, the Opposite Parties did not make the payment of survival benefits of Rs.20,000/- since 28.12.2016 and hence, the Complainant is entitled to the said survival benefits alongwith interest upto 28.02.2019 which comes to Rs.7,300/- and the Complainant is further entitled to future interest till its realisation. As such, there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties. Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs.

a)       To direct the Opposite Parties to make the payment of Rs.27,300/- alongwith future interest @18% per annum till its realization, besides Rs.1 lakh on account of compensation and Rs.20,000/- on account of costs of present complaint and Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses. Hence, the present complaint is filed by the Complainant  for the redressal of her grievances.

2.       On notice,  Opposite Parties  through counsel and contested the complaint  by filing the written version taking preliminary objections therein inter alia that the complaint is not maintainable; that  the complainant has got no locus standi to file the present complaint;  that the complaint is absolutely false and frivolous. It is submitted that the Complainant has been insured under the policy in question with date of commencement 28.12.2006 for sum assured of Rs.1 lakh under table term 75-20. The survival benefit was due on 28.12.2016 under the said policy and the said payment of survival benefit for the said period was made  by Opposite Party  No.2 and thereafter, on the request of policy holder, the record was transferred to Opposite Party  No.1 and policy holder did not contact the Opposite Party  No.2 for any alleged non receipt of payment of survival benefit for the said period. However, Opposite Party  No.2  came to know that the payment for above said period has been rejected due to wrong details of NEFT furnished by the Complainant, only on 26.11.2018 on receipt of letter of policy holder.  Since then the Opposite Parties are asking the Complainant to provide the correct details of NEFT which has not been furnished and due to which the payment for said period remained pending. The Opposite Parties were always ready to make the payment if policy holder supplies the correct details of the NEFT. Ultimately, the correct details have been furnished by  the Complainant on 23.07.2019 and acting promptly, the Opposite Parties have remitted the payment alongwith interest although not due and hence, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties.  On merits, the Opposite Parties took up the same and similar pleas as taken up by them in the preliminary objections and hence, it is prayed that the complaint of the the complainant is liable to be dismissed with special costs.               

3.       In order to prove her case, the complainant has tendered into evidence her affidavit Ex.C1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C16 and closed his evidence.

4.       On the other hand, to rebut the evidence of the complainant, Opposite Parties also tendered  into evidence affidavit of Sh.Harmesh Chander Manager Ex.Ops1 & 2/1, copy of letter dated 23.07.2019 furnished by the Complainant Ex.OP1 & 2/2, copy of NEFT payment Ex.OP1 & 2/3, copy of passbook  of the bank account of the Complainant sent with letter dated 23.07.2019 Ex.OP1 & 2/4 and closed the evidence on behalf of the Opposite Parties. 

5.       We have heard the ld.counsel for the parties and also gone through the documents placed on record.

6.       Ld.counsel for the Complainant has mainly reiterated the facts as narrated in the complaint and contended that the  Complainant purchased policy bearing No.132313983 dated 28.12.2006 from the Opposite Parties and said policy is with the profits and DAB. The premium of the policy was regularly paid since the year 2014-2015 and lastly premium of Rs.6387/- has duly been paid on 28.01.2019 which was duly confirmed by the Opposite Parties. Ld.counsel for the Complainant further contended that said policy was due on 28.12.2016 with survival benefits of Rs.20,000/- and the Complainant accordingly approached the Opposite Parties, but the Opposite Parties wrongly credited the said amount in some another account, but despite repeated requests and reminders, the Opposite Parties did not make the payment of survival benefits of Rs.20,000/- since 28.12.2016 and hence, the Complainant is entitled to the said survival benefits alongwith interest upto 28.02.2019 which comes to Rs.7,300/- and the Complainant is further entitled to future interest till its realisation and as such, there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties.

7.       On the other hand, ld.counsel for the Opposite Parties has repelled the aforesaid contention of the ld.counsel for the complainant on the ground that admittedly the Complainant has been insured under the policy in question with date of commencement 28.12.2006 for sum assured of Rs.1 lakh under table term 75-20. The survival benefit was due on 28.12.2016 under the said policy and the said payment of survival benefit for the said period was made  by Opposite Party  No.2 and thereafter, on the request of policy holder, the record was transferred to Opposite Party  No.1 and policy holder did not contact the Opposite Party  No.2 for any alleged non receipt of payment of survival benefit for the said period. However, Opposite Party  No.2  came to know that the payment for above said period has been rejected due to wrong details of NEFT furnished by the Complainant, only on 26.11.2018 on receipt of letter of policy holder.  Since then the Opposite Parties are asking the Complainant to provide the correct details of NEFT which has not been furnished and due to which the payment for said period remained pending. The Opposite Parties were always ready to make the payment if policy holder supplies the correct details of the NEFT. Ultimately, the correct details have been furnished by  the Complainant on 23.07.2019 and acting promptly, the Opposite Parties have remitted the payment alongwith interest although not due and hence, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties.

8.       It is not disputed that the Complainant purchased the policy (Copy of policy is placed on record as Ex.C2) in question from the Opposite Parties-LIC with date of commencement 28.12.2006 for sum assured of Rs.1 lakh under table term 75-20. It is also not disputed that the survival benefit was due on 28.12.2016 under the said policy and the said payment of survival benefit for the said period was made  by Opposite Party  No.2 and thereafter, the record was transferred to Opposite Party  No.1 and policy holder did not contact the Opposite Party  No.2 for any alleged non receipt of payment of survival benefit for the said period. However, Opposite Party  No.2  came to know that the payment for above said period has been rejected due to wrong details of NEFT furnished by the Complainant, only on 26.11.2018 on receipt of letter of policy holder.  Since then the Opposite Parties are asking the Complainant to provide the correct details of NEFT which has not been furnished and due to which the payment for said period remained pending. The Opposite Parties were always ready to make the payment if policy holder supplies the correct details of the NEFT. Ultimately, the correct details have been furnished by  the Complainant on 23.07.2019 and acting promptly, the Opposite Parties have remitted the payment alongwith interest although not due. Copy of letter furnished by the Complainant Ex.OP1 & 2/2 shows that the correct information with regard to her bank account alongwith IFSC code was provided to the Opposite Parties on 23.07.2019 and immediately on 25.07.2019 the Opposite Parties made the payment to the Complainant amounting to Rs.22,688/- (Rs.20,000/- on account of survival benefit+ Rs.2688/- on account of interest), copy of the said NEFT made by the Opposite Parties is produced on record as Ex.OP1 & 2/3 and this payment of Rs.22,688/- has  nowhere denied by the Complainant and as such, as and when, the Complainant provided the  correct information with regard to his bank particular to the Opposite Parties on 23.07.2019, the Opposite Parties immediately on 25.07.2019  made the requisite payment  of survival benefit alongwith its late payment interest through NEFT to the Complainant and hence, this Commission finds no deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties.     

9.       Hence, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, this District Consumer Commission finds no merit in the complaint and the same stands dismissed. Keeping in view the peculiar circumstances of the case, the parties are left to bear their own costs. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to record room after compliance.

10.     Reason for delay in deciding the complaint.

This complaint could not be decided within the prescribed period because the State Government has not  appointed any of the Whole Time Members in this Commission for about 3 years i.e. w.e.f. 15.09.2018 till 27.08.2021 as well as due to pandemic of COVID-19.

Announced in Open Commission.

Dated: 01.02.2022.