In the Court of the
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,
8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, Kolkata-700087.
CDF/Unit-I/Case No. 18 / 2009.
1) Sri Samir Kumar Ghosh,
501, Natun Para, Ichapur,
P.O. Ichapur Noapara, 24 Parganas (North). ---------- Complainant
---Versus---
1) Managing Director, The Golden Multi services Club Ltd.,
Of Golden Trust Financial Services Club Ltd.,
S.B. Mansion, 16, R.N. Mukherjee Road, Kolkata-700001.
2) Managing Director, IFFCO-TOKIO General Insurance,
9/1, Metro Toweers, 1, Ho Chi Minh Sarani, Kolkata-71.
3) Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority,
3rd Parisharma Bhavan, Baseer Bagh, Hyderabad-500004. ---------- Opposite Parties
Present : Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.
Dr. A. B. Chakraborty, Member
Order No. 3 6 Dated 1 9 / 0 1 / 2 0 1 2 .
The petition of complaint u/s 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 has been filed by complainant Sri Samar Kumar Ghosh against the o.ps. the Golden Multi Services Club and others. The case of the complainant in short is that he became a member of Golden Multi Services Club Ltd. and enjoyed the benefits as per health insurance (mediclaim) coverage of National Insurance Co. a public sector insurance company and in the year 2002 complainant received a group mediclaim insurance certificate from National Insurance Co. Ltd., Division-III with health coverage of Rs.72,000/- each for himself and for his wife. Subsequently o.p. no.1 got themselves tied up with Iffco Tokio General Insurance without beyond the knowledge of the complainant and complainant went on renewed the health scheme by paying premium to o.p. uptil 2006-07. Thereafter o.p. no.1 started stopping receiving premium from the complainant from 2007-08. Subsequently complainant came to know that o.p. no.1 got themselves tied with o.p. no.2. Complainant received health insurance certificate from o.p. no.2 on payment of premium. O.p. no.2 renewed premium w.e.f. 1.9.06 to 31.8.07 vide annex-C and in the event of continuation the date could have been 23.9.06 to 22.9.07. And complainant raised question as regards variation of the date of mediclaim period and o.p. no.2 thereafter refused to renew the policy further on the ground that the contract between o.p. nos.1 and 2 was revoked. Thereafter complainant reference with o.p. no.3 and they also failed to afford any relief. Hence the case.
O.p. nos.1 and 2 had entered their appearance in this cae by filing w/v and denied all the material allegations labeled against them and prayed for dismissal of the case.
Decision with reasons: -
We have gone through the pleadings of the parties together with evidence and documents in particular minutely and we find that the policy of the complainant standing in the name of the complainant and his wife was valid and it is not understood as what prompted o.p. no.2 to discontinue the renewal of the premium of the said mediclaim policy whilst complainant also offered to go for renewal direct with o.p. no.2 vide annex-D.
Now taking into account all the facets as mentioned above on perusal of the record and above findings we are of the view that both o.p. nos.1 and 2 had sufficient deficiency to bona fide complainant / consumer being a service provider and complainant is entitled to relief as prayed for having genuine ground to agitate for relief as mentioned in the prayer portion of the petition of complaint.
Hence, ordered,
The petition of complaint is allowed on contest with against o.p. nos.1 and 2 and ex parte against o.p. no.3. O.p. no.2 is directed to renew the health insurance in continuation of the mediclaim policy from the date o.p. no.2 discontinued i.e. from 23.9.06 and onwards. O.p. no.1 is directed to pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.75,000/- (Rupees seventy five thousand) only as compensation for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) only within 45 days from t he date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 9% p.a. shall carry over entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till the date of realization. Complainant is also directed to pay the premium due from the date of discontinuation to o.p. no.2 to mmake the policy in question alive within 20 days from the date of communication of this order. in event of non renewal of the aforesaid mediclaim policy in favour of the complainant by o.p. no.2 as ordered above a cost of Rs.5 lakhs shall be payable to complainant i.d. complainant shall be at liberty to realize the same by way of execution process.
Supply certified copy of this order to the parties.
_____Sd-____ ______Sd-________
MEMBER PRESIDENT
