This case is coming for hearing on 17.03.2015 in the presence of Sri V.V.Bhaskar Kumar, Advocate for the Complainant and Sri T.V.S.K.Kanaka Raju, Advocate for Opposite Parties and having stood over till this date, the Forum delivered the following:

: O R D E R :

(As per Smt. K.V.R.Maheswari, Honourable President(FAC) on

behalf of the Bench)

1. The case of the Complainant is that one Alanka.Annapurna took Life Policy from 1^st Opposite Party vide Policy No.816296230 for an amount of Rs.2,08,000/- and the Complainant is the nominee in the said policy who is the nephew of life assured. While so Life Assured A.Annapurna died on 25.09.2010, then the complainant intimated the same on 10.10.2010 and also submitted original policy bond and death certificate to the 1^st Opposite Party, but the Opposite Parties did not settle the claim amount and also not gave any reply, but postponing the issue without assigning any valid reason. On 5.9.2012, the 2^nd Opposite Party issued a letter to the complainant by stating that the claim has been settled as closed on 11^th May 2011 for want of relationship proof duly attested by class one Magistrate. Then the Complainant submitted Xerox copies of household card of Life Assured and applicant to 1^st Opposite Party. The 2^nd Opposite Party issued a letter to the Complainant on 13.08.2013 advising him to furnish relationship proof with Life Assured duly attested by Magistrate. Then the complainant got attested Affidavit by Magistrate and send it to 2^nd Opposite Party. After receiving the said Affidavit again they issued another letter to the complainant on 3.12.2013 for requesting identity proof issued by government authorities, which is not at all necessary to settle the claim, but the Opposite Parties’ view is that to drag the matter, thus failed to settle the claim amount. Finally, the complainant issued a Legal Notice on 11.06.2014 to 2^nd Opposite Party to settle the claim amount, then the 2^nd Opposite Party issued a reply notice on 3.7.2014 insisting for furnishing Succession Certificate from Court of law which is not necessary as the nominee is clearly noted in the policy, though there is a mistake in the relationship of nominee instead of nephew, noted therein as Son, which is clearly explained proper perspective in the affidavit got attested by Judicial First Class Magistrate, which is sufficient to settle the claim but the Opposite Parties failed to do so which clearly shows their deficiency in service. Hence this complaint to direct the Opposite Parties (a) to pay the amount of Rs.2,08,000/- with 24% interest from 25.09.2010 (b) to pay Rs.50,000/- towards compensation besides costs of Rs.20,000/-.

2. When the matter posted for filing Counter by Opposite Parties, then on 17.03.2015, the Complainant and the Opposite Parties filed a Joint Memo by agreeing to settle the Complaint out of Consumer Forum for an amount of Rs.2,07,625/- as full and final settlement and the complainant is also present before the Forum. Hence as agreed by both the parties to settle the matter, the Opposite Parties are liable to pay Rs.2,07,625/- to the Complainant.

3. In the result the Complaint is allowed directing both the Opposite Parties to pay Rs.2,07,625/- to the Complainant as full and final settlement. Time for compliance 30 days.

   Dictated to the Shorthand Writer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 19^th day of March, 2015.

    

       Sd/-                                                                 Sd/-

   Member                                                     President (FAC)

                                                           District Consumer Forum-I 

                                                                           Visakhapatnam

   //GLR//