West Bengal

Uttar Dinajpur

CC/14/12

Dhirendra Nath Biswas - Complainant(s)

Versus

Life Insurance Corporation Of India - Opp.Party(s)

Chandan Sarkar

12 Feb 2015

ORDER

Before the Honorable
Uttar Dinajpur Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
Super Market Complex, Block 1 , 1st Floor.
 
Complaint Case No. CC/14/12
 
1. Dhirendra Nath Biswas
Son Of Late Natabar Biswas,Milanpara, Raiganj,
Uttar Dinajpur
West Bengal
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Life Insurance Corporation Of India
Represented by the Branch manager,Raiganj,
Uttar Dinajpur
West Bengal
2. Divisional Manager
LICI, Jalpaiguri Division,Santipara,
Jalpaiguri
West Bengal
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HONORABLE Pulak Kumar Singha PRESIDING MEMBER
 HONORABLE Swapna Kar Member
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

F I N A L   O R D E R

 

This is a case U/S 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with the prayer for an order directing the O.P.s to pay Rs. 20,000/- as sum assured of the Insurance Policy, Rs. 25,000/- as compensation, Rs. 4,500/- as litigation cost and other relief.

 

The complainant’s case in brief is that the complainant was purchased one Life Insurance Policy from the O.Ps. vide Policy No. 35013049, date of commencement on 14.06.1975 and date of maturity was on 14.06.1990. The complainant paid premium regularly and after maturity the complainant approached before the O.Ps. on several times through letter correspondences for payment of policy matured value but the O.Ps. did not pay heed to the claim of the complaint. Finding no other alternative the complainant was forced to come before this Forum.

 

The O.P. No.1 contested the case by appearing on the date of hearing and by filing written version denying the allegations made by the complainant stating inter alia that the instant case is not maintainable, this case is barred by the limitation, policy was not issued by the O.Ps., Raiganj Branch, policy was lapsed due to non-payment of regular premium and as per terms and condition of this Insurance Policy, nothing is payable and the O.Ps. prayed for dismissal of the case.

 

The O.P. No.2 did not contest the case accordingly this case was heard ex-parte against the O.P. No.2.

 

To prove his case the complainant adduced oral evidence and has submitted some photocopies of letter and first page of Insurance Policy.

 

DECISIONS WITH REASONS

 

We carefully perused the complaint petition, evidences adduced by the complainant, written version and argument advanced by the parties. It appears from the document that the complainant was purchased one life insurance policy from the O.Ps., Siliguri Branch, which shows sum assured of Rs.20,000/-, mode of payment 14th yearly and due date of last payment was 14.06.1989. The complainant did not submit any of premium receipts or last payment of premium receipt to prove his case, on the other hand the O.P. No.1 stated in his W.V. that the complainant was paid premium up to yearly due 06/1980 i.e. first unpaid premium as 06/1981. Moreover, as per terms of policy premium paying term was 15 years whereas the complainant has paid yearly premium only Six (6) years, which caused the policy was lapsed. From the policy document filed by the O.P. it reveals that the policy in question mentioned above was whole life policy, there will be no maturity claim under whole life policy. However, L.I.C. was paying full sum assured along with bonus to life assured as maturity claim on attainment of age 100 years, provided death claim has no occurred earlier. Recently L.I.C. has changed their view and is paying full sum assured value with bonus on attainment of age 80 years by the life assured provided the premiums have been paid fully for the premium paying term chosen by the life assured. In the W.V. O.P. No.1 also stated that the policy in question was purchased from Siliguri Branch which is beyond jurisdiction of this Forum, claim of the complainant is time barred and the complainant never contact with Siliguri Branch of L.I.C. for his claim. The complainant has filed some photo copies of letter where nothing mentioned of receipt of acknowledgement. The O.P. No.1 also stated in the W.V. that nothing is payable as per terms of this policy as date of commencement of policy was 14.06.1975, yearly premium paid up to 14.06.1980 but as per terms of policy premium was payable up to 14.06.1989, i.e. 15 years and as such the policy in question was lapsed for which such type of whole life policy nothing is payable to the life assured.

 

In view of the discussions above we find that there is no negligence or deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. as a service provider.

 

Under such circumstance we are of opinion that the complaint has no leg to stand his case accordingly the case of the complaint fails.

 

Fees paid is correct.

 

Hence, it is

ORDERED,

 

That the complaint case No.CC-12/2014 be and the same is dismissed on contest against the O.P. No.1 and ex-parte against the O.P. No.2 without cost.

 

Let copy of this order be supplied to the contesting parties free of cost.

 

 

 
 
[HONORABLE Pulak Kumar Singha]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
[HONORABLE Swapna Kar]
Member

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.