IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.
CASE No. CC /109/2014.
Date of Filing: 19.08.2014. Date of Final Order: 23.09.3015.
Complainant: Debasis Sen, S/O Late Jotindra Ch. Sen, 170/3, Bishnupur Road, Berhampore,
P.O. Cossimbazar Raj, P.S. Berhampore, Dist. Murshidabad. Pin-742102.
-Vs-
Opposite Party: Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India, Berhampore Br.
K.N. Road, P.;O.& P.S. Berhampore, Dist. Murshidabad. Pin-742101.
Present: Sri Anupam Bhattacharyya ………………….President.
Sri Samaresh Kumar Mitra ……………………..Member.
Smt. Pranati Ali ……….……………….……………. Member
FINAL ORDER
Sir Anupam Bhattacharyya, Presiding Member.
The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of C. P. Act, 1986 praying for payment of the policy amount of Rs.1, 55,000/- along with other benefits and other interests and compensation of Rs.30, 000/- for mental pain and agony.
The complainant’s case, in brief, is that the elder sister of the complainant namely Sikha Mitra during her life time took a LICI policy No. 426248387 on 28.07.2007 for an assured amount of Rs.1,55,000/- plus other benefits and other interests. The complainant is the nominee of that policy. On 30.12.2008 the policy holder Sikha Mistra died without any issue at New General Hospital, Berhampore leaving behind her husband Dhananyou Mitra. Dhananjoy Mitra opposed to encash the policy amount in favour of the complainant/nominee of the policy and as a result the OP, without any reason and did not pay the assured sum of the policy to the complainant though the complainant requested the OP many a times to disburse the policy amount. Thereafter, Dhananjoy Mitra, husband of the deceased Sikha Mitra also died on 02.06.2013 and the complainant went to the office of the OP for disbursement of the policy amount but the OP did not pay any heed to that. Thus, there is deficiency in service on the part of the OP/LICI. Thereafter, the complainant filed a written representation before the OP on 31.12.2013 for disbursement of the aforesaid policy amount in his favour being the nominee of the policy. He is legally entitled to get the benefits of the policy. Hence, the instant complaint case.
The written version filed by the OP/Insurance Company, in brief, is that the complainant did not submit any documents before the OP to settle the same claim, including the Claim Form, Death Certificates of the policy holder and her husband. Dhananjoy Mitra, being the husband of the policy holder, raised objection against the disbursement of the policy amount. As such the OP stopped payment covered by the said policy. The policy holder died on 30.12.2008. The policy was taken on 28.07.2007. In that event, as per rules, the complainant did not submit Claim Forms A, B, C and E. The complainant is not entitled to get the policy amount. Just to harass and defame the goodwill of the LICI, he filed this complaint. There is no deficiency on the part of the OP. The complaint is liable to be dismissed. Hence the instant written version.
Considering the pleadings of both parties the following points have been framed for the disposal of the case.
Points for consideration.
- Whether the case is maintainable in its present form and law.
- Whether there is any cause of action to file the present case?
- Whether the case is barred by principal of waiver, estoppels and acquiescence.
- Whether the complaint is barred by law of limitation?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get the relief as prayed for?
- To what other relief/reliefs the complainant may get ?
Decision with reasons.
Point Nos. 1 to 4.
All the points are taken up together for the sake of convenience.
During the hearing argument the Ld. Advocate for the OP has not raised any objection against those four points.
Considering the materials on records, we do not find anything adverse against the complainant on those points and as such those points are disposed of in favour of the complainant.
Point Nos. 5 & 6.
Both the points are taken up together for the sake of convenience.
The complainant’s case, in brief, is that he is the nominee of a LICI policy No. 426248387 which was opened 28.07.2007 by his elder sister Sikha Mitra who died on 30.12.2008 without any issue leaving behind her husband Dhananjoy Mitra who raised objection against the payment of insurance policy.
On the other hand, the OP/LICI case is that the policy holder died on 30.12.2008 . As per rules, the complainant did not file the claim forms such as A, B,C& E. Moreover, the husband of the policy holder raised objection and for that reason they stopped payment.
In this case the complainant has filed his evidence –on-affidavit. He has been cross-examined by the OP. The complainant has filed relevant documents in original i.e the policy certificate and death certificates of both the policy holder and her husband, letter of the complainant dt. 31.12.13 addressed to the OP intimating that the husband of the policy holder died on 02.06.2013 and requested the OP to disburse the policy benefits in favour of the nominee.
During hearing argument ld. lawyer for the complaint has also filed a document (Xerox copy) of the plaint and Injunction Petition under O 39 R 1 read with Sec. 151 of C.P. Code in T.S No. 63/2009 before the court of Civil Judge, Jr. Division(2nd court) , Berhampore.
On hearing argument of ld. lawyers of both sides and also considering the T.S case No. 63/2009 it is clear that Dhananjoy Mitra , husband of the policy holder, filed a suit for declaration and for permanent injunction as to the payment of the policy benefits of his wife.
From the cross-examination of PW-1 it appears that the husband of his elder sister had four brothers and one sister. He cannot say whether they are alive or not.
Further from the documents filed by the complainant it is clear that the said suit was filed by the husband of the policy holder and the husband of the policy holder Dhananjoy Mitra died on 02.06.2013. There is no materials on record as to the fate of the suit filed by Dhananjoy Mitra, husband of the policy holder Sikha Mitra, for declaration and permanent injunction over the disbursement of the policy amount stood in the name of her deceased wife. There are no materials to show that after the death of Dhananjoy Mitra whether his legal heirs have been substituted or not. Also there are no materials whether the suit is still pending or dismissed for non-prosecution. It is clear that the impugned Title Suit was filed after the death of the policy holder Sikha Mitra, by her husband raising objection for payment of the policy amount to the nominee/ complainant who is admittedly the nominee of the policy holder.
Further from the plaint and Injunction petition under O 39 R 1 CPC read with Sec.151 of C.PC filed by the husband of the policy holder , it is clear that in that particular suit there was prayer for Injunction and it is quite obvious that there was restraint order but there is no such order before the Forum showing that there was no Injunction as to the payment of the policy amount. Also there is no order vacating any order of injunction and fate of the suit after the death of the plaintiff Dhananjoy Mitra.
During hearing of argument Ld. Advocate for the complainant has submitted referring Principles of Hindu Law and the Insurance Law as to the nomination by policy holder. He has referred to the Principles of Hindu Law u/s 157 and also the rules Common to all the Schools relating to Stridhana.
This instant case is for payment of insured amount to the nominee and that has been stopped by filing a suit by the husband of the policy holder. Here nominee is the complainant as well as younger brother of the policy holder and the suit filed by the husband of the policy holder. The question of provisions of Hindu law and Insurance Law as referred by the Ld. lawyer for the complainant, we can safely conclude that the matter being sub-judice before the Civil Court, this Forum has no jurisdiction to decide on the point of law as to the entitlement of the complainant.
In absence of specific order of the said suit where the husband of the deceased policy holder has filed a plaint and Injunction petition and the fate of that suit is not known to us, which can easily be obtained by filing Information Slip from the Ld. Civil court, this Forum cannot take any decision as to the legal rights of the complainant.
In the instant complaint filed by the complainant , for absence of any document as to fate of the Title Suit regarding the entitlement for the payment of LICI Policy amount of the deceased policy holder Sikha Mitra, the complainant is not entitled to get any relief in this case.
Considering the above discussion as a whole we can safely conclude that these two points are disposed of against the complainant and the complainant is not entitled to get any relief in this case and as such the case be dismissed.
Considering the decision of all the points together we find that the case be dismissed.
Hence,
Ordered
that the Consumer Complaint No. 109/2014 be and the same is hereby dismissed on contest.
There will be no order as to cost.
Let a plain copy of this order be made available and be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties on contest in person, Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand under proper acknowledgment / be sent forthwith under ordinary post to the concerned parties as per rules, for information and necessary action.
