IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS’ DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT MYSORE<br /> <br /> PRESENT: 1. Shri.A.T.Munnoli<br /> B.A., L.L.B (Spl.) - President <br /> <br /> 2. Smt.Y.V.Uma Shenoi<br /> M.Sc., B.Ed., - Member<br /> <br /> 3. Shri. Shivakumar.J.<br /> B.A., L.L.B., - Member<br /> <br /> CC 181/10 DATED 21.06.2010<br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> Complainant Sri. Manjunath S/o late S. Nanjappa, R/at No.1331, B.N. Road, 4th cross, Mandi Mohalla, Mysore-21.<br /> (By Sri. S.P.K., Advocate)<br /> <br /> Vs. <br /> Opposite Party 1. The Senior Branch/Divisional Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India, Jeevan Jyothi, Hullahalli Road, Nanjangud-571303, Mysore District.<br /> 2. The Senior Divisional Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India, Jeevan Prakash, Mysore-Bangalore Road, Bannimantap, Mysore-15.<br /> (By Sri. S.U., Advocate)<br /> <br /> Nature of complaint : Deficiency in service<br /> Date of filing of complaint : 07.05.2010<br /> Date of appearance of O.P. : 24.05.2010<br /> Date of order : 21.06.2010<br /> Duration of Proceeding : 28 days<br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Sri. A.T.Munnoli,<br /> President<br /> <br /> <br /> 1. The complainant has filed the complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act against the opposite parties, alleging deficiency in service that in spite of maturity of the policy, premium of Rs.308/- under SSS was collected.<br /> <br /> 2. The opposite party in the version though denied deficiency in service, has stated that inadvertently the premium was collected and it is ready to refund the same with interest at the rate of 8%.<br /> <br /> 3. For both the parties affidavits are filed and certain documents are produced. We have heard the arguments and perused the records.<br /> <br /> 4. Now, the point for our consideration is that, whether the complainant has proved any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and that he is entitled to the reliefs sought?<br /> <br /> 5. Our finding is partly in affirmative for the following reasons.<br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> 6. Since most of the facts are admitted, narration of the same is not necessary. In substance, according to the complainant, in spite of maturity of the Insurance Policy, under SSS opposite party collected premium of Rs.308/-. In the version, it is stated, inadvertently said premium was collected and opposite parties are ready to refund the same with interest.<br /> <br /> 7. Hence, the only question remained to be considered is the compensation of Rs.50,000/- and cost of the proceedings. It is fact that, the opposite party after coming to know that, premium was collected after maturity of the policy, had sent a cheque to the complainant. However, the complainant demanded interest thereon. Taking into consideration of the entire facts, we pass the following order.<br /> ORDER <br /> 1. The complaint is partly allowed.<br /> 2. Both the opposite parties jointly and severally are hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.308/- to the complainant with interest at the rate of 8% p.a. from 16.04.2009 till realization, within a month from the date of the order.<br /> 3. Further, the opposite party shall pay a sum of Rs.500/- towards compensation for mental agony and inconvenience caused within a month from the date of the order, failing which the amount will carry interest at the rate of 10% p.a.<br /> 4. Likewise, opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.500/- to the complainant towards cost of the proceedings.<br /> 5. Give a copy of this order to each party according to Rules.<br /> (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, transcript revised by us and then pronounced in the open Forum on this the day 21st June 2010)<br /> <br /> <br /> (A.T.Munnoli) <br /> President <br /> <br /> <br /> (Y.V.Uma Shenoi)<br /> Member<br /> <br /> <br /> (Shivakumar.J.)<br /> Member<br /> <br /> <br />