Karnataka

Mysore

CC/167/2019

Smt.Mubin Taj and three others - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s IDBi Bank Limited and another - Opp.Party(s)

S.J.Lakshmegowda

24 Dec 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM MYSURU
No.1542 F, Anikethana Road, C and D Block, J.C.S.T. Layout, Kuvempunagara,
Kuvempunagara, (Behind Jagadamba Petrol Bunk), Mysuru-570023
 
Complaint Case No. CC/167/2019
( Date of Filing : 28 Mar 2019 )
 
1. Smt.Mubin Taj and three others
W/o Late Syed Shafi Ahmed
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. M/s IDBi Bank Limited and another
M/s IDBI Bank Limited, RAC, MIG-II, Anand Arcade, V.M.Double Road, Saraswathipuram, Mysuru-9.
2. Syeda Noor Fathima
Syeda Noor Fathima, D/o Late Syed Shafi Ahmed.
3. Syed Sadiq
S/o Late Syed Shafi Ahmed.
4. Syed Siddiq
S/o Late Syed Shafi Ahmed, Rep. by natural guardian mother Smt.Mubin Taj, No.2832, Sawday Road, 5th Cross, Mandi Mohalla, Mysuru-570021.
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V MARGOOR PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Devakumar M.C MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
Dated : 24 Dec 2019
Final Order / Judgement

      Again case called at 1.20 PM.  In the morning hours it is wrongly mentioned that complainant present before this Forum. But one Jalil S/o Syed Davur Sab Co-brother of deceased Syed Shafi Ahamad present. But said Jalil not paid Rs.1,000/- cost payable to Consumer Legal Aid Account since every time he has taken time continuously for eight months to hear on admission of the complaint.

      It is the case of complainants that the husband of complainant No.1 and father of complainant Nos.2 to 4 Syed Shafi Ahamad had availed loan from the OP – IDBI Bank Ltd., Mysuru and at the time of availement of the loan, the OP got insured to the said loan amount and started remitting a sum of Rs.12,414/- being premium for three years.  The policy was for eight years commencing from 29.09.2010 and matured on 28.09.2018.  It is further case of complainants that late Syed Shafi Ahamad said to have deposited a sum of Rs.14 to 15 lakhs towards loan amount.  The borrower Syed Shafi Ahamad was died on 27.10.2018 after the maturity of policy i.e. on 28.09.2018.  This complaint is filed by the legal heirs of deceased borrower to direct the OP to renew the insurance policy bearing No.4000237692 and pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards damages for approaching the OP for renewal of the policy.

        On perusal of the complaint and prayer there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP.  Once the insurance policy is matured, deceased or his LRs could have approached the OP to pay the matured insurance amount if it is payable.  Insurance policy could not be renewed and this Forum has no jurisdiction to direct the OP to renew the insurance policy taken by the deceased.  Therefore, the complaint filed by the complainants is not maintainable and deserves to be dismissed.  Accordingly, we proceed to pass the following

ORDER

The complaint is dismissed as not maintainable.

Furnished the copy of order to the complainants at free of costs.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V MARGOOR]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Devakumar M.C]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.