Haryana

StateCommission

A/621/2015

AVIVA LIFE INSURANCE CO. INDIA LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

POONAM DEVI - Opp.Party(s)

INDERJIT SINGH

08 Dec 2015

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

First Appeal No  :      621 of 2015

Date of Institution:      23.07.2015

Date of Decision :       08.12.2015

 

Aviva Life Insurance Company India Limited, Branch Office, 2^nd Floor, SCO No.242, Part-I, Opposite Mini Secretariat, Sector-12, Karnal, Haryana-132001 through their duly constituted attotney Shri Bhuvan Bhaskar available at Branch Office 2^nd Floor, SCO No.45-46-47, Sector 17-A, Chandigarh.

                                      Appellant/Opposite Party No.2

Versus

 

1.      Poonam Devi wife of late Shri Mohan Lal, Resident of House No.108, V.P.O. Diwal, District Kaithal, Haryana.

Respondent/Complainant

 

2.      Madan Lal s/o Sh. Barthu Ram, Resident of VPO Diwal, District Kaithal, Haryana.

                                      Respondent/Opposite Party No.1

 

CORAM:             Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                             Shri B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                             Shri Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member                                                                                                                                         

Present:               Shri Inderjit Singh, Advocate for appellant.

Shri Chander Kant Rana, Advocate for respondent No.1.

Shri Subhash Chand, Advocate for respondent No.2.

                                                   O R D E R

 

NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL)

 

By filing this appeal, Aviva Life Insurance Company India Limited (for short ‘the Insurance Company’)-Opposite Party No.2, has challenged the order dated February 24^th, 2015 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kaithal (for short ‘the District Forum’), whereby complaint filed by Poonam Devi-complainant/respondent No.1, was accepted directing the Insurance Company to pay Rs.16.00 lacs on account of death of her husband.

2.      Mohan Lal (since deceased) husband of complainant (purchased insurance policy (Exhibit C-5) on June 20^th, 2011 for Rs.16.00 lacs from the Insurance Company. The insured died on October 26^th, 2011. The complainant submitted claim with the Insurance Company but it was not settled. Hence, the complainant filed complaint before the District Forum.

3.      Notice of the complaint was issued to the opposite parties.  They were proceeded ex parte vide order dated June 9^th, 2014 observing as under:-

          “Notice sent to Ops No.1 & 2 through registered post on 25.04.2014 not received back either served or unserved. More than one month has been passed. It is presumed that the same might have been delivered to the Ops No.1 & 2, however, despite presumed service none appeared on behalf of Ops. No.1 & 2. Case called several times since morning. It is already 4.00 p.m. The Ops are therefore proceeded against exparte. To come up on 04.08.2014 for evidence of the complainant if any and for arguments.”

 

4.      Perusal of record reveals that on June 9^th, 2014, the District Forum proceeded ex parte against the opposite parties, as notices sent to the them were not received back either served or unserved inspite of the fact that more than one month had expired.  Thus, it becomes clear that on the presumption of service, the District Forum proceeded ex parte against the opposite parties.  Since the Insurance Company was proceeded ex parte before the District Forum, so it could not contest the complaint on merits. Under these circumstances, it would be in the interest of justice to give an opportunity to the Insurance Company to contest the complaint on merits.  Learned counsel for the respondent-complainant has fairly conceded that complainant has no objection in granting opportunity to the appellant to contest the complaint on merits. 

5.      In this view of the matter, the appeal is accepted and the impugned order is set aside. The appellant/Insurance Company is accorded opportunity to join the proceedings before the District Forum. The parties shall be entitled to lead evidence etcetera.  The case is remitted to the District Forum, Kaithal, with the direction to decide the complaint expeditiously preferably within a period of three months, which shall be from the date of first appearance of the parties. 

6.       The parties are directed to appear before the District Forum, Kaithal on December 28^th, 2015.

7.      Copy of this order be sent to the District Forum.

8.      The statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal be refunded to the appellant against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules, after the expiry of period of appeal/revision, if any.

 

Announced 08.12.2015

Diwan Singh Chauhan Member

B.M. Bedi Judicial Member

Nawab Singh President

CL