DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-II
Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi- 110016
Case No.254/2018
ASIF KHAN
B-150, Priyadarshini Vihar
Laxmi Nagar, Delhi-110092
….Complainant
Versus
LIC OF INDIA (BRANCH-119)
Branch Office: C-38,
Shopping Cum Office Complex,
Opp. Moolchand Hospital,
Defence Colony, New Delhi-110024
….Opposite Party
Date of Institution : 06.09.2018
Date of Order : 11.05.2022
Coram:
Ms. Monika A Srivastava, President
Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member
Sh. U.K. Tyagi, Member
ORDER
Member: Sh. U.K Tyagi, Member
1. Complainant has requested to pass an order allowing to provide the remaining payment of Rs.1,00,000/- alongwith interest @12% per annum instead of LIC’s own penal interest @6.43% and a compensation of Rs.50,000/- towards cost of litigation and harassment.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the Complainant is a Life Insurance Policy Holder of LIC of India vide Policy No.111870935. It is averred that the Complainant submitted claim papers on 28.02.2018. After many telephonic/email follow-ups and 30 visits to the Branch/Division-I office of LIC India (Branch-119) (hereinafter referred to as OP) Maturity claim was paid but S.B (Survival benefits) claim is yet to be paid by the OP. The Complainant contended that his policy is money back policy, in which, money back/S.B payment was due on 25.02.2010 for Rs. 20,000/-, 28.02.2012 for Rs. 20,000/-, 28.02.2014 for Rs. 30,000/- and 28.02.2016 for Rs.30,000/- (Total Rs. 1,00,000/-). Complainant has requested to allow the release of remaining payment of Rs. 1,00,000/- alongwith interest@12% per annum.
3. The OP, on the other hand, took some preliminary objections which are based on facts and general in nature. The OP averred that the Complainant was paid Rs. 1,92,000/- as Maturity value under the above mentioned policy on 21.03.2018 and previous survival benefits due on 02/2010, 02/2012, 02/2014 and 02/2016 were already paid by cheques in favour of LICHFL on 28.03.2015, 28.03.2015, 20.02.2015 and 31.03.2016 respectively. But unfortunately, these cheques could not be encashed by LICHFL. At the time of Maturity payment, the official of OP noted that four previous S.B due had already been paid by cheques on the above mentioned dates. So, the Maturity payment was released. The OP further stated that when the complaint to this effect was received by the OP, the official concerned asked the Complainant if the said payment through cheques was not received by LICHFL, then after verification, it was found that said cheques had not been encashed in his account, the same shall be released. The Complainant did not cooperate as the matter pertains to 2015-16 and it could have taken some time. Instead of waiting for some time, the Complainant has filed the instant complaint. The OP maintained that contents of the opening Paras of his complaint so far it relates to matter of record needs no reply, anything contrary to the same are wrong and hence emphatically denied. The 30 visits of Complainant to the office of OP are also denied specifically. It is averred by OP that now, they had enquired into the matter and ready to pay the due S.B by cheques in the name of Asif Khan as the cheques were in the name of LICHFL, after taking necessary permission from the competent authority. It is also further denied that OP is liable to pay interest since the payment/cheques on due dates were released and it was the responsibility of LICHFL to encash these cheques. Hence the OP cannot be penalized for fault of the LICHFL.
4. Both the parties filed evidence in affidavit and Written Submission. Written Statement is on record so is the rejoinder. Oral arguments were heard and concluded.
5. This Commission has gone through the material placed on record. The Complainant vide its rejoinder had alleged that the mistake had been committed by the official of OP and that is why, they came forward to settle the case on the first hearing itself. As per LIC circular the penal interest @6.43 is payable. But in this case entire wrong practices were followed by the official of OP, therefore, the Complainant was pressing hard for interest@12% per annum. It was also noted that the OP after having confirmation from LICHFL and on completion of the formalities, paid the S.B amount before this Commission but the request of Complainant is also to allow the interest @12% per annum instead of OP’s own penal interest @6% per annum. The OP all through in written statement or elsewhere maintained that the cheques were made for due S.B amount as mentioned in detail in above Paras. But nowhere, the OP has produced the evidence to show that these cheques were dispatched to the address of LICHFL or handed over to him physically. In all, this Commission feels that the OP is deficient in service and negligent in not issuing these cheques to the LICHFL. No confirmation of issuance of cheques was advanced before this Commission also. The Complainant also received four cheques i.e Cheque No. 197121, 197122, 197123 and 197124 for Rs. 23,676/-, Rs.23,676/-, Rs.34,410/- and Rs.34,276/- respectively on 18.01.2019. The only contention of the Complainant is to charge the higher rate of interest on SB.
6. In view of facts and circumstances of the case, we are of considered opinion that the OP is directed to re-calculate the rate of interest @8.25% per annum from the date of survival benefits due on 02/2010, 02/2012, 02/2014 and 02/2016. It is also clarified that interest so levied and disbursed as stated above on the SB amount may be adjusted. And OP being deficient in service and negligent is also further directed to pay Rs.5000/- as litigation charges and harassment. The above amount of interest so accrued on account of interest and compensation amount should be paid within 3 months from the date receipt of this orders. failing which rate of interest shall be charged @10% per annum till its realization.
File be consigned to the record room after giving a copy of the order to the parties as per rules. Order be uploaded on the website.
