BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM: KURNOOL
Present: Sri. T.Sundara Ramaiah, B.Com B.L., President
And
Sri. M.Krishna Reddy, M.Sc., M.Phil., Male Member
And
Smt. S.Nazeerunnisa, B.A., B.L., Lady Member
Tuesday the 24th day of January, 2012
C.C.No.78/2011
Between:
Vadde Nadipanna,S/o Late Venkata Swamy,
D.No.1/120, Resident of Vadala Village,Pamulapadu Mandal,Kurnool District.
…Complainant
-Vs-
1. M/S PACL India Limited,Represented by authorised signatory,
7th Floor, Gopaldas Bhawan, 28, Barakhamba Road,New Delhi - 110 001.
2. M/S PACL India Limited,Represented by authorised signatory,
51/1F and 1F1, Adil Complex, Bellary Raod,Kurnool Town and District - 518 004.
...Opposite ParTies
This complaint is coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri C.C.V.Ranga Reddy, Advocate for complainant and opposite party No.1 called absent and Sri S.Krishnudu, Advocate for opposite parties 1 and 2 and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following.
ORDER
(As per Sri. T.Sundara Ramaiah, President)
C.C. No.78/2011
1. This complaint is filed under section 12 of C. P. Act, 1986 praying:-
- To direct the opposite parties to pay an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- together with interest and other miscellaneous charge towards compensation;
- To award compensation of Rs.50,000/- for causing inconvenience and mental agony to the complainant on account of deficient conduct on the part of the opposite parties;
- To grant a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards cost of the complaint;
- To pass such other relief or reliefs as the Honourable Forum deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
2. The case of the complainant in brief is as under:- The complainant Son Vadde Ramana @ Vadde Venkata Ramana paid an amount of Rs.5,000/- as first installment to the opposite parties. The opposite parties issued first installment receipt cum acceptance letter bearing Sl.No.7455386 date d 15-11-2006 in favour of the complainant sum. The opposite parties also issued a bond dated 15-11-2006. The complainant is the nominee under registration letter dated 15-11-2006. On 09-12-2007 the complainant son vadde Ramana died in a lorry accident. A case in Crime No.133/2007 of Guidpally P.S. Nalgunda District was registered against the driver of the lorry. The complainant is entitled to receive the benefits under the bond issued by the opposite parties. After the death of the Vadde Ramana complainant claimed the amount from the opposite parties. The opposite parties did not make any payment to the complainant. The complainant also got issued legal notice to the opposite parties. The opposite parties gave a reply notice with false allegation. Hence the complaint.
3. Opposite party No.1 called absent and set exparte.
Opposite party No.2 filed written version stating that the complainant is not maintainable. There is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties. This Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint as there is an arbitration clause. The territorial jurisdiction lies in the Civil Courts in Delhi. The opposite parties were doing Real Estate Business. The son of the complainant approached the opposite parties for allotment of land. The complainant son he entered an agreement with the opposite parties for allotment of the land Unit. In case of the death of the unit holder the nominee can continue the payments under the plan. The opposite party is not a insurance company. It is no where stated in the agreement executed that in the case of the death of the unit holder his illegal representative is entitled for compensation. There is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties. The complaint is liable to be dismissed.
4. On behalf of the complainant Ex.A1 to A11 are marked and sworn affidavit of the complainant is filed. On behalf of the opposite parties Ex.B1 and B2 are marked and sworn affidavit of the opposite part No.2 is filed.
5. Both sides filed written arguments.
6. Now the points that arise for consideration are:
- Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of Opposite Parties?
- Whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs as prayed for?
- To what relief?
7. POINTS i and ii:- The complainant is the father of Vadde Ramana. Admittedly the complainant son vadde Ramana deposited Rs.5,000/- as first installment and executed an agreement for allotment of land. The opposite parties issued Ex.A1 registration letter and Ex.A2 installment receipt cum acceptance letter dated 15-11-2006 in favour of Vadde Ramana. The period of scheme under Ex.A1 and Ex.A2 is from 15-11-2006 to 15-11-2012. The estimated realizable value at the end of the term is Rs.46,200/-. The complainant who is the father of Vadde Ramana is the nomine under Ex.A1 registration letter.
8. It is the case of the complainant that his son Vadde Ramana died in a road accident on 09-12-2007. The complainant in his sworn affidavit clearly stated about the death of his son Vadde Ramana on 09-12-2007. The complainant also filed Ex.A3 to Ex.A5 to show that his son Vadde Ramana met with an accident on 09-12-2007. Ex.A6 is the death Certificate issued by the Village Revenue Officer, Vanala Village Pamulapadu Mandal, Kurnool District, where in it is mentioned that the complainant son Vadde Ramana died on 09-12-2007 due to lorry accident. In the light of documentary evidence available on record it cannot be safely said that Vadde Ramana son of the complainant died on 09-12-2007 in road accident.
9. It is the case of the complainant that after the death of his son he requested the opposite parties to settle the claim, that the opposite parties did not consider his claim and that he got issued legal notice to the opposite parties. Ex.A7 is the legal notice got issued by complainant to the opposite parties. The opposite parties also gave reply notice Ex.A10. It is the contention of the opposite parties that they are no liable to pay any compensation to the complainant merely because the complainant son died in a accident. Admittedly the opposite parties are not insurance companies. As seen from Ex.A1, Ex.A2 and other documents filed it is very clear that the opposite parties are doing Real Estate Business. The complainant filed Ex.A1 and Ex.A2. It is mentioned Ex.A1 that the term of the scheme is Six years. The amount of installment is Rs.5,000/- payable yearly. It is also specifically noted that the estimated realizable value at the end of the term is Rs.46,200/-. The complainant son paid only first installment of Rs.5,000/- on 15-11-2006. The next premium was due by 15-11-2007. The complainant did not place any documentary evidence to show that his son paid the second premium of Rs.5,000/- on or before on 15-11-2007. The complainant son committed default in payment of the second installment. Admittedly on the death of the unit holder, the complainant who is the nominee under Ex.A1 did not pay the installments to the opposite parties. There is also no mention in Ex.A1 and Ex.A2 that in the case of the death of the unit holder nominee is immediately entitled for the estimated value. Any how there is clearly mention that the estimated realizable value is payable only at the end of the term i.e., after 15-11-2012. The complainant who is a nominee is not entitled for any amount prior to 15-11-2012. No document is marked on behalf of the complainant to establish that in the case of the accidental death by original unit holder the nominee is entitled for a sum of Rs.45,000/-. There is no mention in Ex.A1 and Ex.A2 that the nominee is entitled for a sum of Rs.45,000/- in case of the accidental death of the original unit holder. The opposite parties rightly refused the claim of the complainant. There is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties. The complainant is not entitled for any relief.
10. In the result, the complaint is dismissed without costs.
Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open bench on this the 24th day of January, 2012.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MALE MEMBER PRESIDENT LADY MEMBER
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant : Nil For the opposite parties : Nill
List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-
Ex.A1 Policy bearing Sl.No.7455386 dated 15-11-2006 issued by
PACL India Limited, New Delhi.
Ex.A2. First Premium receipt No.F0449973 for Rs.5,000/-
dated 15-11-2006.
Ex.A3 Photo copy of F.I.R. in Crime No.133/2007
dated 10-12-2007 of Guidpally P.S., Nalgunda District.
Ex.A4 F.I.R. in Crime No.133/2007 dated 10-12-2007 of
Guidpally P.S., Nalgunda District.
Ex.A5 Photo copy of Post Mortem Certificate
dated 10-12-2007.
Ex.A6 Photo copy of Death Certificate dated 12-01-2008
issued by Revenue Officer, Vanala village, Pamulapadu
Mandal, Kurnool District.
Ex.A7 Office copy of legal notice dated 26-04-2010.
Ex.A8 Postal Receipts Nos.4095 and 4096.
Ex.A9 Postal Acknowledgement
Ex.A10 Reply Notice dated 10-05-2010.
Ex.A11 Re-Reply Notice dated 30-08-2010 along with postal
receipt.
List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties:-
Ex.B1 Agreement printed booklet including application Form
No.03B-11/2744501.
Ex.B2 Empty PACL Policy Sl.No.1373213.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MALE MEMBER PRESIDENT LADY MEMBER
// Certified free copy communicated under Rule 4 (10) of the
A.P.S.C.D.R.C. Rules, 1987//
Copy to:-
Complainant and Opposite parties :
Copy was made ready on :
Copy was dispatched on :
