JUDGEMENT Today is fixed for passing final order in respect of the objection filed by the op challenging the maintainability of this case and also on the ground that the case is completely barred by limitation u/s 24 of C.P. Act 1986. In fact op filed such objection on the ground of maintainability of this case before this Forum on 25.03.2014 on account of that complainant lodged this complaint on 18.02.2014 in respect of two policies bearing No. 33243164 having commencement date 08.11.1975 and having maturity date 08.11.1996 and another policy No.33371861 dated of commencement on 15.12.1976 and maturity date was 15.12.1995 and sum assured was Rs.10,000/- each and in both the cases yearly premium was Rs.400.70 paisa and Rs.456.90 paisa. But the complainant’s allegation is that it was in the name of his father Late Madan Mohan Dutt who purchased the said Children’s Deferred Endowment Assurance with Profit Scheme and it was not in his knowledge because his father died already and after that very recently somehow searched out the same from unused box and thereafter he submitted it for relief. But op’s version is that in only one case the premium was paid and thereafter it was lapsed long back in the year 1975-76 and at best the complaint and ought to have been filed by 1998 but it has been filed after lapse of 26 years. So, it is completely barred by limitation and along with the complaint that was not considered by the Forum. So, it is hopelessly barred by limitation for which complaint should be dismissed and as same is not barred by limitation and same is not maintainable and in support of that one ruling reported by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.4962/2002 (Kandimalla Raghavaiah & Co. – Vs - National Insurance Co. & Ors.) on 10.07.2009 passed by Hon’ble Justices D.K. Jain and R.M. Lodha and from that judgement it is found that it is the duty of the Forum to see before admitting any complaint that it has been filed within two years from the date of cause of action and practically in this case cause of action arose long back in the year 1998. On the other hand complainant submitted that it was done by his father and his father died and after certain searching, his mother searched out the same and handed over it and fact remains that it is the duty of the Insurance Company to return the same which is actually payable to the insured but that has not been done and another point was pointed out by the complainant that as because it was not purchased by him and the document was not with him. But it was substantially searched out and invariably the Insurance Company cannot grab the money of the insured only on the ground that any insured has failed to produce any document in time. Considered the entire materials and no doubt it was the situation so beyond control of the complainant. But fact remains cause of action arose after the death of his father. But complainant did not place it in time as he failed to search out the same. But it was collected by his mother but anyhow complainant ought to have an application for condonation of delay u/s 24A of C.P. Act 1986 at the time of filing this complaint but that has not been done. But apparently it is time barred and for which no doubt the complaint should not be entertained or decision as it is time barred u/s 24A of C.P. Act 1986. But anyhow the Insurance Company cannot grab the amount what the insured or his heirs are entitled to get as per law. If any policy is lapsed as per IRDA Guideline, the amount as entitled by the insured shall be refunded by the Insurance Company but that has not been done by the Insurance Company. All over India Insurance Company is not here and there for only to grab the amount of the lapsed policy. But it is their legal duty to return what amount the insured is entitled to as per IRDA Guideline but that has not been done and as because the complaint is time barred for that reason the op cannot be relieved from payment of that amount what actually they have entitled. In the light of the above observation, we are confirmed that this complaint is no doubt time barred u/s 24A of C.P. Act 1986. But op shall have to refund the amount what the insured or on the death of insured his legal heirs the present complainant are entitled against the above two policies and it must be done by the op because Insurance Company is here and there to serve the social and moral purpose also because Insurance Act is a social legislation and the entitlement of any insured cannot be swallowed by any Insurance Company only on the ground that it is time barred. So, op shall have to act accordingly by refunding the amount what the complainant on his father’s death is entitled and against the present two policies and it must be done within two months from the date of this order, otherwise complainant shall have his liberty to file further complaint if this is not complied by the op.
| | [HON'ABLE MR. Ashok Kumar Chanda] MEMBER[HON'ABLE MR. Bipin Muhopadhyay] PRESIDENT[HON'ABLE MRS. Sangita Paul] MEMBER | | 
