Punjab

Patiala

CC/15/41

Paramjit Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Life Insurance Corporation - Opp.Party(s)

Sh A D S Bhullar

14 Jul 2015

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

PATIALA.

 

                                      Complaint No. CC/15/41 of 13.2.2015

                                      Decided on:        14.7.2015

 

 

Paramjit Singh s/o Sardara Singh, aged 56 years R/o 17, Baba Shri Chand Marg, Opposite Govt. Printing Press, Patiala  

 

                                                                   …………...Complainant

                                      Versus

Life Insurance Corporation of India, through its Branch Manager, of North Zone, Chandigarh Division, Branch Office, Unit No.1, Post Box No.31,8-9 (Ist Floor), Jeevan Jyoti , Chhoti Baradari, Patiala.

 

                                                                   …………….Op

 

                                      Complaint under Section 12 of the

                                      Consumer Protection Act.

 

                                      QUORUM

 

                                      Sh.D.R.Arora, President

                                      Smt.Neelam Gupta, Member

                                      Smt.Sonia Bansal,Member                               

                                                                            

Present:

For the complainant:     Sh.A.D.S.Bhular , Advocate

For Op:                           Smt.Mandeep Kaur, Advocate             

                                     

                                         ORDER

D.R.ARORA, PRESIDENT

1. The complainant had purchased Life Insurance Policy No.170216806 from the Op. The maturity date of the policy was 12.12.2009. On the policy being matured, the Op was under the obligation to disburse the maturity amount but despite the complainant having approached the Op time and again, the same was not disbursed. The Op retained the maturity amount of the policy with it in order to make a wrongful gain and to cause a wrongful loss to the complainant. The complainant suffered the loss in a sum of Rs.40175/- as also the interest thereon. The same amounted to a deficiency in service on the part of the Op. The maturity amount was not paid till 24.10.2014, when the same was credited in the account of the complainant. Therefore, the complainant is entitled to interest @18% per annum for the period 12.12.2009 to 24.10.2014, amounting to Rs.55,666/-. The complainant had visited the office of the Op on 17.11.2014 and gave the application-cum-protest in writing vide Annexure-B. Ultimately, the complainant has brought this complaint against the Op asking for the payment of the interest w.e.f.12.12.2009 till date and to award the compensatory costs against the Op.
2. On notice, the Op appeared and filed the written version. It is admitted by the Op that the complainant was issued the Life Insurance Policy No.170216806, the maturity date of which was 12.12.2009. It is denied that the Op had failed to disburse the maturity amount. The payment under the policy was processed on 28.12.2009, on receipt of the requisite documents. The complainant was sent a letter calling for the documents, in connection with the payment of the maturity amount on 15.10.2009, followed by subsequent letter dated 29.12.2009. The payment under the policy was processed on 28.12.2009 and cheque No.00309965 dated 31.12.2009 in a sum of Rs.40,175/- was issued. The cheque, so issued by the Op had not been got encashed by the complainant and therefore, the cheque got stale on 31.3.2010, after a lapse of three months from the date of the issuance. Now the payment of the maturity amount has been made through the stale cheque. The complainant had approached the Op in its office on 22.10.2014 for making the payment and on the complainant having  provided the NEFT particulars on 22.10.2014, the payment was credited into the account of the complainant on the same day. It was a fault on the part of the complainant who failed to present the cheque for encashment within a period of three months from the date of the issue. After denouncing the other averments of the complaint, going against the Op, it was prayed to dismiss the complaint.
3. In support of his complaint, the complainant tendered in evidence Ex.CA his sworn affidavit alongwith the documents Exs.C1 to C2 and the complainant closed his evidence.
4. On the other hand, on behalf of the Op, it’s counsel tendered in evidence Ex.OPA, the sworn affidavit of Ms Hem Lata, Manager (L&HPF) in the Divisional Office of the Op at Chandigarh alongwith the documents Exs.OP1 to OP13 and closed the evidence.
5. The parties filed the written arguments. We have examined the same, heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the evidence on record.
6. It is the plea taken up by the Op that the payment of the maturity of the policy for Rs.40,175/- was made vide cheque No.00309965 dated 31.12.2009 and that the complainant failed to get the same encashed thereby resulting into cheque becoming stale and that on the basis of the stale cheque, payment was again made on 22.10.2014 through NEFT on the complainant having furnished the particulars in that regard.
7. In this regard, the Op has produced in evidence Ex.OP1, the photo copy of the letter dated written as 9/12/20K , by the Branch Manager of the Op at Chhoti Baradari, Patiala to the complainant, whereby the complainant was informed that maturity claim due on 12.12.2009 was intimated to him on 15.10.2009. He was also sent the reminder on 29.12.2009.The maturity claim was settled vide cheque no.309965 dated 31.12.2009 for Rs.40,175/- but the cheque was not got encahsed by him and therefore, no interest for delayed payment had become due. The said letter is shown to have been sent through registered post but the Op has not produced any postal receipt to show that the letter was ever posted to the complainant.
8. The Op has also produced Ex.OP8, the copy of letter dated 28.12.2009, purported to have been issued by Sr.Branch Manager/ Divisional Manager of the Op at 8-9 Chhoti Baradari Patiala, addressed to the complainant, written in continuation of their letter dated 15.10.2009 and he was informed that on receipt of the documents on 28.12.2009 they were sending the cheque for Rs.40,175/- drawn in his favor. The letter does not bear the signatures of any officer nor does it contain the particulars of the cheque qua the name of the bank. Ex.OP9 is the copy of the claim payment voucher, which is not shown to have been enclosed with letter Ex.OP8 but the  same contains the particulars of the amount of the claim at maturity and the number of the cheque i.e. 0309965 dated 31.12.2009.Ex.OP10 is the copy of the letter dated 29.12.2019 purported to have been sent by the Branch Manager of the Op at Chhoti Baradari, Patiala, addressed to the complainant, whereby he was requested to return the discharge form duly executed alongwith original policy bond and bank account number to enable them to settle the claim. Again the letter does not bear the signature of any officer. Ex.OP11, is the copy of data sheet dated 16.10.2009, whereby the amount of the maturity payable was worked at Rs.40,175/-.Ex.OP12 is the copy of the letter dated 15.10.2009, sent by the Op to the complainant asking for original policy for cancellation as also discharge voucher contained alongwith letter to be executed by the complainant. Again the letter does not bear the signature of any officer. The Op has not produced in evidence any proof to show that the complainant was sent cheque No.309965 dated 31.12.2009 for Rs.40,175/- through registered post or through any other mode like courier service etc. and that the letter was received by the complainant. Surprisingly the Op has not produced in evidence the very copy of the letter vide which the cheque was sent to the complainant. Therefore, the plea taken up by the op that the cheque had not been got encahsed by the complainant cannot be accepted and rather appears to be without any basis.
9. Ex.OP2, is the copy of the letter dated 24.7.2014, written by the Op through its branch at Chhoti Baradari, Patiala, to the complainant whereby he was informed, “ Under  above policy we have settled maturity benefit claim  due on 12.12.2009 of Rs.40,175/- vide our cheque No.309965 dated 31.12.2009. However, we wish to inform that the said payment by cheque/NEFT has returned undelivered or cheque has become stale. For issue of fresh payment in lieu of stale cheque you are required to submit the following:-

Fresh payment will be credited to your bank account directly. For this purpose kindly submit the NEFT mandate as given below……..”

10. It was submitted by Sh.A.D.S.Bhullar, the learned counsel for the complainant that the Op is not sure as to whether the cheque was returned undelivered or the same had become stale because there is no clarity made out in this regard by the Op in letter, Ex.OP2. Had the letter containing the cheque been delivered to the complainant, there would have been no difficulty for the Op  to produce the record regarding the same as discussed earlier. The Op could easily collect the report from the post office regarding the delivery of the registered letter to the complainant. in the absence of which the plea taken up by the Op that the cheque was sent to the complainant and the same was not got encahsed by him can not be believed.
11. It was rather submitted by Sh.A.D.S.Bhulalr, the learned counsel for the complainant that in case cheque No.309965 dated 31.12.2009 for Rs.40175/- had not been got encahsed by the complainant, the Op should have initiated the payment of the same after the expiry of a period of three months w.e.f. 31.12.2009 because until the amount of the cheque was debited from the account of the Op, it could not be said by the Op that the  payment had been made by the Op to the complainant. It is only when the complainant approached the Op that the payment was made by the Op on 24.10.2014 through NEFT, in respect of which the Op has produced the record consisting of Exs.OP6 and OP7.
12. We are of the considered view that the Op has utterly failed to show that it had ever remitted cheque no.00309965 dated 31.12.2009 for Rs.40175/- drawn in favor of the complainant and that the same was received by the complainant and further that the complainant failed to get the same encahsed. Surprisingly, the Op has failed to disclose the name of the bank upon which the cheque was drawn. No record, maintained by the OP, in the office, with regard to the issuance of the cheque in favor of the complainant is produced. After ala the Op would have maintained one or the register regarding the payment of the maturity amounts of the polices in favor of the insured but no such record is produced. We, therefore, do not find any hesitation in coming to the conclusion that the Op had not  made the payment of Rs.40,175/-, the maturity value of the policy No.170216806 , due on 12.12.2009 and the same was made only on 24.10.2014 through NEFT vide Exs. OP6 and OP7 and therefore, the same amounted to a deficiency of service on the part of the Op in having withheld the maturity amount for the period 13.12.2009 to 24.10.2014. It is the plea taken up by the complainant that he approached the Op personally on 17.11.2014 and lodged the written protest vide application moved in this regard, the same being Ex.C2, vide which he claimed the interest for the delayed payment. The application Ex.C2 bears the endorsement No.764 dated 17.11.2014 LIC-I Patiala but the Op has not lead any evidence to rebut the receipt of the same. The complainant is certainly entitled to be compensated  as he was deprived of the amount of the maturity and the Op made a wrongful use of the same .We accordingly accept the complaint and direct the Op to pay the amount of interest @9% per annum for the period 13.12.2009 to 24.10.2014 within a period of one month on receipt of the certified copy of the order. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the complaint is accepted with costs assessed at Rs.4000/-.

Dated:14.7.2015

 

                   Sonia Bansal                Neelam Gupta                        D.R.Arora

          Member                        Member                                  President