BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.251 of 2016

Date of Instt. 14.06.2016

Date of Decision: 22.01.2019

Anita Kumari Daughter of Sh. Daulat Ram resident of 37-A/131, New Vijay Nagar, Jalandhar.

..........Complainant

Versus

1. Life Insurance Corporation of India, Divisional Office, Jeevan Parkash, Model Town Road, Jalandhar-144001 through its Senior Divisional Manager.

2. Life Insurance Corporation of India, CAB Branch, Pucca Bagh, Milap Chowk, Jalandhar through its Branch Manager.

3. Manager (CRM)/CPIO, Life Insurance Corporation of India, Divisional Office, Jeevan Parkash, Model Town Road, Jalandhar-144001.

….….. Opposite Parties

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before: Sh. Karnail Singh (President)

Smt. Jyotsna (Member)

Present: Sh. K. C. Malhotra, Adv Counsel for the Complainant.

Sh. S. C. Sood, Adv Counsel for the OPs.

Order

Karnail Singh (President)

1. The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein alleged that the complainant being a real sister of Ramesh Kumar (since deceased) son of late Shri Daulat Ram filed the instant complaint being having a bill dated 19.04.2004 executed deceased Ramesh Kumar in favour of the complainant. During his life time, deceased Ramesh Kumar got insurance policy No.130385427 for Rs.50,000/- and second Insurance Policy No.131882669 for Rs.2,00,000/-. These policies were taken from OP No.2, who is a subordinate or under the administrative control of OP No.1, but unfortunately, insured Ramesh Kumar expired on 29.03.2005 and after the death of Ramesh Kumar insured, Daulat Ram father of the complainant lodged an insurance claim, vide letter dated 18.06.2005 to OP No.2. In response to aforesaid letter, OP No.2 informed on 14.07.2005 and called upon the father of the complainant to submit succession certificate, but no reason was given for obtaining a succession certificate. However, to ill luck of the complainant, her father had also expired on 02.11.2005 and resultantly, a succession certificate could not be obtained by his father as demanded by the OPs.

2. That there was matrimonial dispute between Ramesh Kumar, Life Assured and his family, so Ramesh Kumar was being looked after by the complainant and Ramesh Kumar was living with the complainant. Before death of Ramesh Kumar, while he was in sound disposing mind with his own sweet will had executed a Will dated 19.04.2004 in favour of the complainant. By virtue of that Will, the complainant has become entitled to claim money payable under the policies under reference and the amount of claim by death is payable only to the complainant and none else.

3. That the complainant made an application under Section 6 (1) of RTI Act, 2005 to Manager (C.R.M.) designated Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) under Section 5 of the RTI Act, 2005 to provide disclosable information and documents relating to the Policies subject matter of the complaint and the basis for making payment of Death Claim when no Succession Certificate was obtained and provided to the OPs by the claimant, who allegedly was paid claim money of these policies under valid and binding assignment as stated and that too without production of original policy bonds free from encumbrance, but OP No.3 blankly decline to provide disclosable information and documents requested on lame excuses that the documents sought pertained to third party. These documents are necessary and material for the complainant in order to seek legal remedy and relief against OPs regarding their manipulation in respect of claim money payments illegally and unlawfully, unauthorizedly, arbitrary and malafide. The OPs have failed to supply copies of documents and information as sought for and detailed in RTI Application dated 02.12.2015. Hence, in the absence of all these documents, the complainant is destitute. It is not feasible for the complainant to approach appropriate Redressal Forum to seek remedy available under the law of the land against monetary loss caused and suffered by the complainant, depriving the complainant of claim money of the policies payable to the complainant. Non-supply of documents and information under reference tantamount to deficiency in rendering service envisaged under the Act and as such, the complainant is a consumer of OP being a real sister and beneficiary under the Will and the insurance is covered under the Consumer Protection Act being a Service Provider and accordingly, the instant complaint filed with the prayer that to direct the OPs to supply legible authenticated copies of the documents as mentioned in Para No.11 of the compliant and further OPs be directed to pay compensation, damages of Rs.50,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.5500/-.

4. Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs, who filed reply and contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the complainant has concealed the earlier litigation and the litigation with the natural heirs of deceased Ramesh Kumar. The petitioner is not the natural heir of Ramesh Kumar. Natural Heirs are Sunita widow of Ramesh Kumar and Shivam @ Mohit son of Ramesh Kumar and without impleading them in the present complaint, the complaint cannot be filed and further averred that the complainant earlier filed a suit in order to claim the inheritance from the property of Ramesh Kumar on the basis of Will alleged in this complaint dated 19.04.2004. The suit was filed by the complainant and other against Sunita and Shivam and accordingly, the Court of Sh. Sanjeev Joshi, the then Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jalandhar dismissed the suit of the complainant, vide judgment and decree dated 29.12.2012 and the complainant further filed an appeal, which was dismissed by the Court of Sh. Rakesh Kumar Sharma, the then Additional District Judge, Jalandhar, vide judgment dated 28.11.2014 and further alleged that the complainant is in the knowledge that the OP has paid the amount of policies to Sunita and Shivam as per the orders passed by the Court of Sh. Munish Garg, the then Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jalandhar. Once the amount has been paid by the OPs, no complaint is maintainable against the OPs and as such, the complainant is estopped by her own act and conduct to file the present complaint. On merits, the averments made in the complaint are controverted and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits and the same may be dismissed.

5. In order to prove the case of the complainant, the counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence two affidavits of the complainant as Ex.CA and Ex.CB along with some documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-7 and closed the evidence.

6. Similarly, counsel for the OPs No.1 to 3 tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.OPA along with some documents Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP- 6 and closed the evidence.

7. We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also gone through the case file very minutely.

8. In nutshell, if we take into consideration the contents of the complaint, then find the main claim of the complainant is that she is having a Will dated 19.04.2004 executed by his brother deceased Ramesh Kumar insured and on the basis of that Will, she has filed the instant complaint being a beneficiary.

9. To the contrary, the OPs alleged that the complaint of the complainant is bad for non-joinder of necessary party i.e. the wife of the deceased insured Ramesh Kumar and his kid and these facts further cleared from the copy of judgments placed on the file by the OP i.e. copy of judgment passed by the Court of Sh. Munish Garg, PCS, the then Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), Jalandhar and copy of the judgment is Ex.OP-2, wherein Sunita is shown as widow of Ramesh Kumar insured and Shivam @ Mohit is shown as son of Ramesh Kumar insured and both are the plaintiffs in that Civil Suit, they sought mandatory injunction against the Life Insurance Corporation to pay the maturity amount of the Insurance Policy No.130385427 and that amount was ordered to pay to the widow and son of the deceased Ramesh Kumar insured. Not so, the complainant Anita Kumari D/o Daulat Ram also contested an other case filed by the wife of deceased Ramesh Kumar insured i.e. Sunita and son Shivam @ Mohit, that Civil Suit was decided by the Court of Sh. Sanjiv Joshi, the then Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Jalandhar, vide judgment Ex.OP-4 and in that Civil suit, the wife and son of the deceased Ramesh Kumar insured sought declaration and also challenged the Will in question, the said Will was declared null and void and against that judgment, the complainant of the present complaint filed an appeal, which was decided by the Court of Sh. Rakesh Kumar Sharma, the then Additional District Judge, Jalandhar and copy of the judgment is Ex.OP-5 and the said appeal filed by the present complainant, which was dismissed and now, we find that the complainant being know the fact that the Will in question has been already declared null and void by the Civil Court as well as also by the Appellate Court, despite that the complainant has miserably and knowingly just to get insurance claim from the OP, filed the instant complaint by concealing the material facts i.e. the previous litigation decided between the parties in regard to same matter in issue by the Civil Court and as such, the act committed by the complainant is a serious act of negligence and therefore, the complainant is liable to be punished for that serious concealment.

10. Apart from above, the counsel for the OPs brought to our notice that the instant complaint is not maintainable because the complainant has only sought a relief regarding non supply of documents. In pursuance of the submission of learned counsel for the OP, we have gone through the contents of the complaint and find that the complainant virtually claimed the relief that there is a deficiency in service on the part of the OPs because the documents so demanded by the complainant under RTI Act were not supplied and further sought direction to the OP to supply the said documents and also claimed compensation and litigation expenses.

11. From the perusal of the file, it reveals that the complainant initially apply for supplying of the documents to the Insurance Company i.e. OP and copy of the said application is Ex.C-7 and against that order, an appeal was preferred by the complainant before the Appellate Authority, who also passed the order, copy of the same is Ex.C-1 and thereafter, remedy before the complainant is only to go in second appeal before the State Information Commission, but instead of preferring a second appeal under RTI Act to the State Information Commission, the complainant filed the instant complaint, which is apparently not maintainable before this Forum.

12. From the face of the complaint, it seems that the complaint is frivolous, the same has been filed just to harass the OPs and waste the time of this Forum, therefore, the complaint of the complainant deserves to be dismissed, but subject to heavy cost and accordingly, ordered that the complaint of the complainant is dismissed with cost of Rs.20,000/-, which is to be deposited in District Legal Aid Fund of Jalandhar. It is further ordered that the complainant will deposit the aforesaid cost within 30 days from the date of receipt of the copy of order, failing which the Superintendent of this Forum will file an execution before the Forum for recovery of the said amount. File be consigned to the Record Room, but after recovery of the said cost. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules.

Dated Jyotsna Karnail Singh

22.01.2019 Member President