Orissa

Cuttak

CC/104/2018

Samir Nayak - Complainant(s)

Versus

New India Assurance CO Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Self

03 Oct 2019

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,CUTTACK.

C.C No.104/2018

Samir Nayak,

(A nominee of deceased father)

S/O:Late Judhistir Nayak,

At:Potapokhari,PO:Nayabazar,

P.S:Chauliaganj,Dist:Cuttack-753004.                                               .… Complainant.

 

Vrs.

1.              The Senior Divisional Manager,

The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,

Department of Rupay-Insurance Program-2016-17

DO142300,1^st Floor,NCL Premises,

Plot No.C-6,Bandra Kurla Complex,

Bandra East,Mumbai-400051.

 

2.             The Branch Manager,

Canara Bank,

Nayabazar Branch,Cuttack-4,Odisha,

Near Nayabazar Chhak

 

3.             The Director of NPCI

1001 A,B-Wing,10^th Floor,

The Capital,

Bandra Kurla Complex,

Bandra East,mMumbai-400051,India.… Opp. Parties.

 

Present:               Sri Dhruba Charan Barik,President.

Smt. Sarmistha Nath, Member (W).

 

Date of filing:    10.10.2018

Date of Order:  03.10.2019

 

For the complainant  :    Self.

For the O.P No.1         :   Mr. R.M.Mohanty,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.P No.2.        :   Mr. A.Pattnaik,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.P No.3         :   Shreyashi Gupta (A/R).

 

 

 

 

Smt. Sarmistha Nath,Member(W).

                                                                               

                The complainant has filed this complaint before this Forum against the O.P for Redressal of his grievances U/S-12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986(Act in short) in terms of his prayer made in the complaint petition alleging deficiency in service on the part of O.P.

1. The case of the complainant in brief is that the complainant is a nominee of his deceased father Late Judhistir Nayak of At:Patapokhari,Nayabazar in the district of Cuttack-4,Odisha in respect PMJDY A/c No.4919108000191 maintained at Canara Bank,Nayabazar Branch,Cuttack.  The deceased account holder had availed a Rupay classic debit card under PMJDY Scheme and performed minimum one successful financial transaction at any channel both intra and inter Bank i.e. ATM card, issued by the Canara Bank,Nayabazar Branch,Cuttack.

The nominee of the PMJDY Savings account holder Late Judhistir Nayak, the complainant aged about 31 years.The nominee of Late Judhistir Nayak approached the Canara Bank,Nayabazar,Cuttack after the death of his father, but he was two months late to intimate the case to the Bank.Whenever the complainant approached the bank, he found there was no Branch Manager in duty at that time.After a lapse of eleven months, the complainant again approached the bank but the other manager disagrees to receive the application for death claims.On 09.3.18 when the new Manager joined the complainant again submitted all the claim papers to him.Due to delay in processing of the insurance claim by the banking authorities, the complainant approached the Banking OMBUDSMAN,RBI,.Bhubaneswar on 6.4.18 andreceived a letter from R.B.I,Banking OMBUDSMAN on 21.5.18.The complaint number is 2017180032129 of R.B.I Banking OMBUDSMAN,Bhubaneswr,Odisha.

Thereafter the complainant approached the Insurance OMBUDSMAN on 7.7.18 through a postal letter and received a letter from the Insurance OMBUDSMAN on 17.7.18.After that, he submitted all the claim papers including a case file against the above said Insurance Company.

The case No.0.1.0.01/BBSR/G-049-1819-0064 was lodged at the Insurance OMBUDSMAN by the complainant but the case has been pending. The complainant had sent three letters of the Grievance Redressal of New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,87,M.G.Road,Mumbai-1 on 21.7.18,8.9.18 and 6.10.18 as per the advice of the Insurance Ombudsman but no reply from the Grievance Redressal(NIA’S) and sent a letter to the O.P No.3.On the same day i.e. on 7.9.18 the complainant also sent another letter to the Deputy Manager.The complainant had already intimated the case to the Senior Divisional Manager (NIA’S) through a letter on 18.7.18 along with all the required documents for the disposal of the claim amount.

The complainant has prayed before this Forum to direct the O.Ps to compensate him for his physical health and mental harassment of Rs.2,50,000/- and to pay Rs.50,000/- for deficiency in service, mental tension, waste of time and energy.

2. The O.Ps submitted their written version separately.  The O.P No.1 in his written version submitted that they are a public Sector Insurance Company having its registered office at New India Assurance Building,87-M.G Ropad,Fort,Mumbai and a Divisional office at 1^st Floor,NCL Premises, Plot No.C-6,Bandra Kurla Complex.  Bandra, East, Mumbai-400051.

The divisional office at Bandra Kurla Complex,Mumbai had issued a Master Policy to Canara Bank bearing policy No.14230042/60/00000005 covering Rupay Debit Card Holders of the Bank.It was personal accidental insurance policy for a sum insured of Rs.1,00,000/- for each card holder.It undertook that if during the currency of policy period the card holder dies in an accident, the policy shall pay the sum insured of Rs.1,00,000/- to the nominee of the account holder.Late Judhistir Nayak was a card holder of Canara Bank at Nayabazar,Cuttack and he died on 12.4.17 arising out of a road accident on 27.3.17.The son of complainant approached the bank 11 months after the death of his father with the claim.The bank forwarded the documents to the insurance office in Mumbai.As a matter of fact, the claim should have been lodged immediately after the accident but the claim having been lodged after 11 months of the accident.It was necessary to investigate the matter, condone the delay in intimation and process the claim.The O.P after being satisfied that the cause for delay in lodging the claim was bonafide and the claim lodged was genuine, paid the sum insured of Rs.1,00,000/- to the complainant through NEFT on 16.10.18.The attested copies are annexed as Annexure-D/1 & D/2.

The complainant himself admits that he was not aware about the insurance cover and that after considerable delay when he found that there was insurance covering the accidental death of his father, he lodged the claim and in spite of delay, the O.P has paid the claim way back in October,2018.The present complaint has become infructuous and needs to be dismissed.

3. The O.P NO.2 submitted their written version and stating that complainant‘s father Late Judhistira Nayak had a PMJDY Savings Account No.49191080091 with Canara Bank,Nayabazar Branch,Cuttack.  He had also availed Rupay Classic Debit Card.  After his death due to accident his nominee the present complainant claimed insurance for the death of his father under Rupay Classic Debit Card linked with PMJDY Savings Account.

The complainant submitted accidental claim on 9.3.18 to the branch after lapse of 11 months from the death of insured Late Judhistira Nayak.As per the Rupay insurance scheme, the claim intimation should be made within Ninety days from the date of accident/death.However the branch submitted all the claim paper to the India Assurance Company Ltd and the claim amount of Rs.1,00,000/- has been received by the complainant on 16.10.18 in hisSavings Bank Account No.491910800156.

As per the Bank circular no.479/2014 dt.3.9.14 the NPCI (National Payment Corporation of India) has made arrangement with insurance companies and provides insurance cover to account holders of Canara Bank Rupay Classic Debit Card.The insurance companies cover the risk of death or permanent disability due to accident and the extent of cover is Rs.1,00,000/- (one lakh) Rupay card.

The present complainant has already received Rs.1 lakh as insurance claim for accidental death of his father under Rupay Debit Classic Card from New India Assurance Co. Ltd. on 16.10.18, so he is not entitled to any further amount. The O.P No.2 further submitted that a bank branch cannot run without a Branch Manager.The complainant has made such allegation only to cover up his own lapse in submitting the claim application late.In this case the claim application was considered and the claim has already been settled and as such there is no deficiency in service on the part of O.P bank.The complainant has filed this case with deliberate and mischievous intent to make wrongful gain and it may be dismissed.

4. The O.P No.3 (National Payments Corporation of India) submitted written version stating that it is a non-profit company incorporated under Sec-25 of the Companies Act,1956.  O.P No.3 is a retail electronic payment system service provider authorized by the Reserve Bank of India under the provisions of the Payment and Settlement Systems Act,2007.  O.P No.3 provides electronic infrastructure for processing, transmitting, linking and clearing of payment instructions issued by the customers of the member banks.  O.P No.3 has no nexus with any customer of its member banks.   Role of O.P No.3 is limited only to premium payment to insurance company for providing insurance cover to Rupay Card holders in the event of accidental death or permanent disablement due to accident and no claims are either registered and/or processed by O.P no.3.  The nominee of the Rupay card holders required to lodge the insurance claim with its respective bank and the bank in-turn is required to collect all the necessary documents, details and submit the same to the insurance company for claim processing.  The present complaint against O.P No.3 is not maintainable either under law or no facts of the case. The complainant has not availed any service of O.P No.3 for any monetary consideration.

Purely on good faith and as a goodwill gesture the matter was investigated by O.P No.3 where it was ascertained that the amount so claimed by the complainant has already been settled and cleared by O.P No.1 on 16^th October,2018 vide UTR No.AXISP00016836089.  The O.P No.3 grossly denies the entire allegation mentioned in para-16 and prayer portion of the complainant as the amount so claimed by the complainant has already been settled and cleared by O.P No.1, hence no amount/compensation is payable by O.P.3.  Since the complainant is not a consumer of O.P No.3, the question of O.P.3 being deficient in providing the service does not arise at all.  Hence all the allegations of the complainant as stated in para-16 and prayer clause of the complainant are grossly denied and to dismiss the present complaint against O.P.3.

5. We have heard from the parties at length, went through the pleadings of the parties and perused the documents and papers filed by the parties.  Admittedly the late father of the complainant had a PMJDY Savings account with Canara Bank and he had also availed Rupay Classic Debit Card.  As per the Bank circular no.479/2014 dt.3.9.2014, the NPCI (National Payment Corporation of India) has arrangement with Insurance Companies and provides insurance cover to risk of death or permanent disability due to accident to the holder of Canara Bank Rupay Debit Card and the extent of cover is Rs.1,00,000/-.  The complainant has submitted the claim application of late and the O.Ps have paid the claim amount after making necessary investigation and the complainant has received the same on 16.10.2018.  We are of the considered views that there is no negligence on the part of O.Ps.  During course of argument the complainant submitted that the O.Ps have paid the legal dues within ten working days of receipt of the claim as per the terms and conditions and the circular issued by the authorities.  So there is negligence on the part of the O.P which amounts to deficiency in service.  On the other hand the counsel for the O.ps submits that the complainant has not made the claim during the stipulated period still then the O.Ps have settled the claim.
6. Considering the submissions of the parties, we are of the view that though the claim was made of late, but the O.Ps being statutory authorities are under legal obligation to settle the claim within 10 working days from the date of receipt of complete documents.  But the O.Ps have failed to discharge their duties which amounts to deficiency in service and O.Ps are jointly and severally liable for the same.

ORDER

Basing upon the facts and circumstances of the case, the case is allowed on contest.  The O.Ps are directed to pay a compensation of Rs.30,000/-(Rupees thirty thousand only) towards mental agony and harassment  to the complainant within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

                Typed to dictation, corrected and pronounced by the Hon’ble Member in the Open Court on this the 3^rd day of October,2019  under the seal and signature of this Forum.

 

  ( Smt. Sarmistha Nath )

                      Member (W)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               (Sri D.C.Barik)

                                                                                                     President