DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KANDHAMAL, PHULBANI

                                                                                C.C.NO.09 OF 2017

Present: Sri Rabindranath Mishra            - President.

                 Miss Sudhiralaxmi Pattanaik   -  Member .

                  Sri Purna Chandra Tripathy       - Member .

Smt Bijaylaxmi Panda, aged about -30 years

W/O: G. Late Harihar Panda Village – Budaguda Po: Budaguda,

PO/PS: Baliguda .Dist: kandhamal                                                   ……………………….. Complainant.

                                Versus.

1. Manager-cum Postmaster

C.P.C, Phulbani . H.Q- Phulbani

At/PO/PS: Phulbani Dist: Kandhamal

2. Post Master General, Berhampur Region,

At/Po/PS: Brhampur. Dist: Ganjam

3. Superintendent of Post Offices

Phulbani Division At/PO/PS: Phulbani Dist L Kandhamal.

4. Postmaster, Buduguda Post Office

At/Po- Buduguda PS: Baliguda Dist: kandhamal

5. Krushna Chandra Panda

S/O: Late Bainath panda At/PO: Buduguda

PS: Baliguda Dist: Kandhamal by profession- Teacher               …………………………….. OPP. Parties.

For the Complainant: Sri Bhagaban Mohanty Advocate, Phulbani and his Associates.

For the OPP. Parties: For O.P No.1 to 4 –Self, For O.P No-5 -None.

Date of Order: 30-10-2017

                                                                                       O R D E R

                                                The case of the Complainant in brief is that her husband had started a Rural Post Life Insurance (RPLI) Policy bearing no.R-OR-BF-EA-11445 dated 29-01-2004 but her husband expired on 17-11-2015. The premiums were deposited by her husband regularly till his death. The said

                                                                                                -2-

policy was opened before the marriage of her husband for which his brother Krushna Chandra panda was a nominee of the said policy. She is the legal married wife of the deceased and they have two minor children. Being the legal heirs of the deceased she applied to the O.P No.1 for settlement of the death claim but he returned the policy without taking any steps for settlement of the claim. The sum assured to the tune of Rs. 1,00000/-(one lakh) under the said policy. As the O.Ps are responsible for non- settlement of the claim in favor of the Complainant, they have committed deficiency in service. Hence, this complaint was filed for a direction to O.P No.1 to 4 to settle the death claim of the said policy with 18% annual interest since 17-11-2015, the date of death of her husband. She is also claiming Rs. 30,000/- towards compensation for her mental agony and financial loss along with Rs. 10,000/- as cost of litigation.

                                                The O.P No.5, the nominee was set exparte in this case as he refused to receive the notice. The case of the O.P No.1 to 4  as per their joint version is that during Life time Late Harihar Panda had taken one Rural Post Life Insurance policy in his name on 29-01-2004 for sum assured Rs. 1,00000/- only. He had assigned the name of his brother Krushna Chandra panda as his nominee. The last premium was deposited in the month of October 2015. One Smt. Bijay Laxmi Panda applied to the Manager cum Post Master of Phulbani Head Office on 03-06-2016 for settlement of the claim along with all his documents. Since the Complainant is not the nominee of the policy, she was refused of the claim by O.P No.1. The nominee was nominated by the deceased as per the Life Insurance Rules 2011 .As per rules 6A and 6C of the Postal Life Insurance Rule 2011, the settlement of death claim in favor of the Complainant is not entertenable. The claim can only be settled if received from the nominee. Hence, they prayed to dismiss the case, as the Complainant is not a Consumer.

                                                During course of hearing we have gone through the complaint petition, the joint version of O.P No.1 to 4 and the copies of the documents filed by both the parties in support of their case.

                                                We have heard both the parties. It is submitted by the Leaned counsel of the Complainant that the Complainant and her two minor children are the legal heirs of the deceased Harihara Panda, the Policy holder .The nominee was nominated by the husband of the Complainant before his marriage. After the death of the policy holder, the family members are not maintaining the Complainant and her children. The O.P No.5 is also not pulling well with the Complainant. So, the death claim should be settled in favor of the Complainant. It is pointed out by the O.P that as per postal life insurance rule 2011, the nominee is entitled to get death benefit of the deceased.

                                                In this case the O.P No.5 was nominated as nominee being the brother of the deceased but he is not coming forward to put forth his case and set exparte as refused to receive the notice of this Forum. So, he is not interested to get the death claim of the policy. It is the case of the Complainant that the O.P No.5, the nominee is not pulling well with her and the families of the deceased are not maintaining the Complainant and her two minor children.  As per principle of natural justice the O.P No.5 should not enjoy the property of the deceased when his legal heirs are

                                                                                                -3-

 alive. It is seen from the legal heir certificate issued by the Tahasildar, Darigibadi, Kandhamal that the Complainant is the wife of the deceased and one Pragyan Priyadarshani Panda aged about 6 years is the daughter and one Animesh panda aged about 3 years  is the son  of the deceased. As per Hindu succession Act, the widow, son and the daughter of the deceased are class -1 heirs and the brother of the deceased is coming under class-2 heir. So, when class 1 heirs are alive, they are entitled to get the benefit of the policy. The rules of Postal Life Insurance cannot supersede the Hindu Succession Act as far as the property of the deceased is concerned.

                                                It is alleged by the O.P that the Complainant is not a Consumer but it is the settled principle of law is that the legal heirs are also bonafide Consumers. Hence, the Complaint petition filed by the Complainant against the O.Ps is allowed by us on contest against O.P No.1 to 4 and exparte against O.P No.5.

                                                In the above circumstances the O.P No.1 to 4 are jointly and severally directed to settle the death claim application of the Complainant and to release the entire  amount of the policy of the  deceased bearing No. R-OR-BF-EA-11445 in favor of the Complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. The O.P No.1 to 4 are further directed to issue two separate chques in the name of Pragyan Priyadarshani Panda and Animesh Panda, the minor children of the deceased for an amount of Rs. 50,000/-each which shall be deposited in any nationalized Bank for ten years under fixed deposit scheme . The rest amount be given to the Complainant. In case of failure to comply the order the O.P No.1 to 4 are jointly and severally shall pay 10 % annual interest on the entire awarded amount to the Complainant from the date of this order till the date of payment .

                                                With the above direction the C.C is disposed of. Supply free copies of this order to both the parties at an early date.

          MEMBER                                                                             MEMBER                                                             PRESIDENT