Delhi

New Delhi

CC/545/2014

Beena Devi - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s. LIC of india - Opp.Party(s)

-

07 Jan 2020

ORDER

 

 

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

(DISTRICT NEW DELHI,  M-BLOCK, 1^ST FLOOR,

VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P. ESTATE. NEW DELHI-1100001.

 

C.C.No.545/2014

 

Smt. Beena Devi,

W/o Late  Anand Kumar,

R/o F-2/57, Sangam Vihar,

New Delhi-80

.

                                  ….Complainant

 

Vs.

 

M/s  Life Insurance  Corporation of India,

Divisional Office-1,

Jeevan Prakash,

25, Kasturba Gandhi Marg,

New Delhi-110001

 ….Opposite Party

 

NIPUR CHANDNA, MEMBER

 

 

O R D E R

 

 

The complainant has filed the present complaint against the OPs under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The brief facts  of the present complaint are that the complainant’s late husband had taken a Life Insurance Policy, bearing no.116322895 for assured sum of Rs.2 lacs from the OP on 24.11.2010. It was alleged that under the said policy, the complainant was declared as nominee by Life Assured.

2.     It was alleged that on 26/11/2010 complainant’s husband  started having severe pain in his abdomen as such he was taken to AIIMS hospital, and during treatment  he was declared dead by the attending doctor. It was alleged that the complainant being the nominee under the aforesaid policy preferred a claim with the OP along with all the requisite documents. Despite continuous persuasion, OP neither settled the claim nor had repudiated the same, hence this complaint.

 3.    Complaint has been contested by OP. OP filed written statement opposing complaint of the complainant. It was alleged that Life Assured was suffering from chronic liver disease related to alcohol and was serial drinker.  The policy was taken on 24.11.2010, the Life Assured was admitted in hospital on 25.11.2010 and he died on 28.11.2010 i.e. within a period of 4 days from taking the policy.  The  insured  had given false replies in the application for insurance as such the policy was obtained by concealment and suppression of material facts. It was alleged that the claim was rightly repudiated on 16.4.2012.   It is further stated that the present complaint is hopelessly barred by time limitation and is liable to dismissed on this ground alone.  

4.     Both the parties filed evidence by way of affidavit. Parties also filed written arguments.

5.     The counsel for OP has strongly challenged the question of limitation hence, need to be decided first.  

 

 As per section 24(A) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 : -

1. The District Forum, the state commission or the National Commission shall not admit a complaint unless it is filed within two years from the date on which the cause of action has arisen.

 

2. Notwithstanding anything contained in subsection (1). A complaint may be entertained after the period specified in sub-section (1), if the complainant satisfies the District Forum, the state commission or the National Comission , as the case may be, that he had sufficient cause for not filing the complaint within such period: provided that no such complaint shall be entertained unless the National Commission , the State Commission or the District Forum, as the case may be records its reason form condoning such delay.

6.     On the point of limitation, we are guided by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case title State Bank of India Vs. M/s B.S. Agriculture Industries 2009 STPL 6945 SC – in that case in para 12 the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as under :-

“As a matter of law, the consumer forum must deal with the complaint on merit only if the complaint has been filed within two years from the date of accrual of cause of action and if beyond the said period, the sufficient cause has been shown and delay condoned for the reason recorded in writing. In other words, it is the duty of the consumer Fora to take notice of section 24 A and give effect to it.

7.     In the present complaint, the insured died on 28.11.2010. The OP Ins. Co. repudiated the claim on 16.4.2012,  hence,  in our view, the date of repudiation of claim by OP constitute the cause of action for filing the present complaint. The complainant had failed to place on record an application for condonation of delay in filing the present complaint.  The complainant ought to have filed the present complaint within two years of the accrual of cause of action i.e. from  the date of repudiation  i.e. on 16.4.2012, which she failed to do so.  The complainant filed the present complaint on 17.7.2014 i.e.  beyond the period of two years of the accrual cause of action.

 8.    In view of the above discussion and the judgment cited above,  we are of the considered opinion that the present complaint is barred by limitation, therefore, we find no merits in the present complaint, same is hereby dismissed.

 This final order be sent to server (www.confonet.nic.in ). A copy each of this order each be sent to both parties free of cost by post.  File be consigned to Record Room.

 

Announced in open Forum on 07/01/2020.

 

      (ARUN KUMAR ARYA)

  PRESIDENT

                                                (NIPUR CHANDNA)                                                 (H.M. VYAS)

                                                      MEMBER                                                                MEMBER