Haryana

Karnal

401/11

Sushil Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

Sh. Raj Kumar

27 Dec 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL.

                                                               Complaint No.401 of 2011

                                                             Date of instt.:06.07.2011

                                                              Date of decision:27.12.2016

 

Sushil Kumar Goel son of Shri Madan Gopal resident of House no.2153, Sector-13, Urban Estate, Karnal.

 

                                                                   ……..Complainant.

                                      Vs.

Life Insurance Corporation of India, Branch no.164, Model Town, Karnal through its Branch Manager.

 

                                                                   ………… Opposite Party.

 

                     Complaint u/s 12  of the Consumer Protection Act.

 

Before                   Sh.K.C.Sharma……….President.

                   Sh.Anil Sharma…….Member.

 

Present:-      Sh.Rajiv Gupta Advocate for the complainant.

                    Sh. Pankaj Malhaotra Advocate for the Opposite parties.

                  

 ORDER:

 

                        This complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer protection Act 1986, on the averments that he obtained policy no.170409160 from the opposite party on 20.2.1991. The said policy was to mature on 20.02.2011. He received letter from the opposite party, wherein it was mentioned that maturity amount would be Rs.1,61,200/- besides bonus of Rs.4200/- and thus the total amount would be Rs.1,65,400/-. However, the opposite party issued a cheque of Rs.1,49,000/- and the said cheque was not signed any authorized person and when he presented the cheque for encashment with the banker, the bank refused to honour the same. He visited the office of opposite party a number of times, but no official listened to him. Ultimately, he got served a legal notice dated 15.4.2012, but the same also did not yield any result. In this way, there was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party, which caused him mental agony and harassment apart from financial loss.

2.                Notice of the complaint was given to opposite party, who put into appearance and filed written statement controverting the claim of the complainant. Objections have been raised that the complainant has no locus standi and cause of action to file the complaint; that this forum has got no jurisdiction to entertain and try the present complain and that complainant has concealed the material facts from this forum.

                   On merits, it has been submitted that due to inadvertence a letter was sent to the complainant showing the maturity amount of Rs.1,61,200/- on the basis of the earlier bonus and the amount of bonus of the current year could not be corrected in the said letter. However, the bonus payable on the sum assured was correctly reflected in the letter attached with the cheque. It was a matter of regret that the cheque did not bear the requisite signature, therefore, could not be encashed. When the said mistake was brought to the notice of the opposite party, a fresh cheque no.280301 dated 2.9.2011 for Rs.1,49,400/- (being Rs.25000/- i.e. 25% of the sum assured vested bonus for 20 years i.e. Rs.1,20,400/- @ Rs.1204/- per 1000 plus final additional bonus of Rs.4000/- @ Rs.40 per thousand) was given to the complainant as per bonus rate declared for the period of 31.3.2010 to 20.10.2011. Policies which matured from 1.1.2011 onwards, new bonus chart declared for 31.3.2010 was being referred as per the rules of the Corporation, while the discharge forms are sent in advance, which shows the payment of bonus as per the old bonus chart declared on 31.3.2009. So, the opposite party made correct payment of Rs.1,49,400/- as per the bonus chart of 31.3.2010.  In this way, there was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

3.                In evidence of the complainant, his affidavit Ex.C1 and documents Ex. C2 to C6  have been tendered.

4.                On the other hand, in evidence of the opposite party, affidavit of Ajay Gupta Manager Ex.O1 and documents Ex.O2 to Ex.O12 have been tendered.

5.                We have appraised the evidence on record, the material circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties.

6.                The complainant obtained policy from the opposite party on 20.2.1991 and the same was to mature on 20.2.2011. Admittedly, the opposite party had issued a letter to the complainant, the copy of which is Ex.C6, showing the maturity value of Rs.1,61,200/-. It is also admitted fact that the opposite party issued cheque of Rs.1,49,400/- to the complainant on 20.2.2011, but the same was not signed by any authorized signatory, therefore, same not be got  encashed. Thereafter, opposite party issued a fresh cheque of Rs.1,49,400/- in favour of the complainant on 2.9.2011 and the same was encashed by the complainant. The complainant has claimed that he was entitled to get Rs.1,61,200/- as maturity value plus Rs.4200/- as bonus i.e. total amount of Rs.1,65,400/-, but the opposite party issued him cheque of Rs.1,49,400/-. The complainant has also claimed interest on the amount due w.e.f. 20.2.2011 when the opposite party had issued the unsigned cheque Ex.3.

7.                The opposite party had produced the copies of the results of the valuation as on 31.3.2010 bonus charts Ex.O2 and results of valuation as on 31.3.2009 bonus charts Ex.O5 to Ex.O7. The status report of the policy of the complainant has been produced as Ex.O8. Calculation of the claim of the complainant has been given in Ex.O9. Maturity value was calculated as Rs.1,49,400/- on the basis of the results of valuation as on 31.3.2010. The policy of the complainant was to mature on 20.2.2011. Therefore, the valuation as 31.3.2010 was to apply to the policy to the complainant. The documents produced by the opposite party make it emphatically clear that as per the valuation on 31.3.2010 the maturity amount of the complainant was correctly calculated as Rs.1,49,400/-. Learned counsel for the complainant could not point out any defect in the valuation charts dated 31.3.2010 and calculation of the amount on that basis by the opposite party. Thus, the complainant has not been able to establish that he was entitled to get Rs.1,65,400/- including bonus as maturity value. The complainant cannot get any claim on the basis of inadvertent mistake made by the opposite party in the calculation. Under such circumstances, we have no hesitation in arriving at the conclusion that the opposite party had rightly paid Rs.1,49,400/- to the complainant as maturity value of the policy.

8.                The opposite party had initially issued cheque of Rs.1,49,400/- in favour of complainant on 20.2.2011, but that cheque was not signed by any authorized person, therefore, the same could not be got encashed. Lateron, the opposite party issued cheque for the same amount i.e.Rs.1,49,400/- in favour of the complainant on 2.9.2011. Thus, the complainant suffered loss of interest during the period of 20.2.2011 to 2.9.2011. Consequently, he is entitled to get interest on the said payment as per the term of the policy for the period of 20.2.2011 to 2.9.2011. Non-payment of such interest by the opposite party to the complainant certainly amounted to deficiency in service.

9.                As a sequel to the foregoing discussion, we accept the present complaint and direct the opposite party to pay interest on the amount of Rs.1,49,400/-@ 9% per annum from 20.2.2011 to 2.9.20011   We further direct the opposite party no.1 to pay Rs.5500/- to the complainant on account of mental agony and harassment suffered by him and for the litigation expenses. This order shall be complied within 30 days from the receipt of copy of this order. It is made clear if the calculated interest amount is not paid within stipulated period then this amount will carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of announcement of this order till its realization. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced

Dated: 27.12.2016

                                                                                      (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                                         President,

                                                                             District Consumer Disputes

                                                                             Redressal Forum, Karnal.

                             (Anil Sharma)

                               Member`