ORDER
This complaint is filed for a direction to the opposite party to accept the balance payment of Rs.2,00,000/- and features premiums from the complainant and to reinstate the policy with all benefits and also for compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- and Rs.50,000/- as cost of the Consumer Welfare Fund and to award Rs.25,000/- towards cost of the proceedings with such other reliefs.
At the stage of admission, heard the advocate regarding limitation.
Then, this matter is posted for orders.
The points that arise for consideration of this Forum are as under :-
- Whether the complaint is barred by limitation?
- To what order?
Our findings on the above points are as follows:-
Point No.1:- In the affirmative.
Point No.2:- As per the final order.
REASONS
Point No.1:- The counsel representing the complainant submits that first premium relating to the policy bearing No.11176746 was accepted on 27.07.2007 and issued the insurance policy in favour of the complainant. Then the complainant has promptly paid the premium for 5 years. Suddenly, the opposite party intimated the complainant that his policy is cancelled (no date is mentioned). Subsequently, on 11.09.2012 when the complainant give a representation that he intends to continue the policy and on 30.102012 a legal notice was issued and when the reply was given by the opposite party on 27.02.2013 and subsequently in July 2015 when complainant again visited the opposite party for continuation of policy which was refused within the jurisdiction of this Forum. Thereby, the complaint is well in time as such sought for admission the complaint.
By reading the para 18 of the complaint, series of dates are given by the complainant to show when actually the cause of action arises. Firstly, on the date of acceptance of first premium i.e. 27.07.2007. Next for 5 years, the complainant has paid the premiums, all of a sudden the opposite party intimated the complainant that his policy is cancelled. But the date of cancellation of policy is not deliberately mentioned by the complainant. Actually i.e. the date of cause of action for the complainant. But, the complainant further pleads that on 11.09.2012 when the complainant give a representation and further on 30.10.2012 when legal notice was issued and on 27.02.2013 refusal reply was given by the opposite party and in July 2015, complainant met the opposite party in person and requested to insistent the policy which was refused by the opposite party. From these specific allegations made by the complainant, the cancellation was earlier to 11.09.2012 even in this letter dated 11.09.2012 date of cancellation of policy is not mentioned. Thereby, the complainant ought to have filed the complaint immediately on receipt of intimation regarding cancellation of policy which made in the year 2012 and must be prior to 11.09.2012. If i.e. the date of cancellation of policy, the cause of action survives for 2 years to file the complaint. Before 11.09.2014 the complainant ought to have filed the complaint as per the provision of section 24(A)(1). But, there is inordinate delay of more than one year one month, there is no explanation on the side of the complainant in this regard. Further complainant has produced a letter of opposite party dated 27.08.2015, in which the opposite party directed the complainant to collect the amount, if not collected so far, but this letter will not help the complainant since there is no acknowledgement of any liability relating to continuation of policy.
The Hon’ble National Commission in the following two judgements as specifically held that the date of service of legal notice will not give raise to any cause of action. The reported judgments are:
- I (2015) CPJ 105 (NC) – Appu Mangarathnam Vs. Shai Sha Finance and Chits and another.
- IV (2014) CPJ 509 (NC) – Richard Raja Singh and others Vs. Ford Motor Company Ltd.,
In view of the said two judgements, any amount of argument will not help the complainant to say that the cause of action arose subsequently 11.09.2012 or in 2013 or July 2015 as pleaded in para 18 of the complaint. Thereby, the present complaint is clearly barred by limitation, since it has not been filed within two years from the date of caution as contemplated under section 24(A)(1) of the C.P.Act. Hence, the Point No.1 answered in the negative.
Point No.2:- In view of the above findings recorded on point No.1, the complaint is barred by limitation, hence the complainant is not entitled for any reliefs. Hence, we pass the following order:-
ORDER
Complaint is dismissed as barred by limitation.
