MRS.RAJASHREE AGARWALLA,MEMBER:-
Deficiency in service in respect of non-disbursement of premium amount on Rural Postal Life Insurance are the allegations arrayed against the Opp.Parties.
2. Complaint, in brief reveals that complainant obtained a Rural Postal Life Insurance Policy on dtd. 31.03.2011 amounting of Rs.50,000/- under Sansarfal Branch post office. As per the policy complainant paid Rs.2036/- vide Receipt No.65868 as 1st installment. Complainant further deposited the same amount on dtd. 28.10.2011vide Receipt No. 94052,April 2012 and on dtd.24.11.12 vide receipt No.153844. It is alleged that after a lapse of two years complainant did not receive the policy bond, though the policy bond should be delivered to the complainant within six months on receipt of policy bond complainant stopped further payment of premiums. It is further alleged that on non-receipt of policy bond complainant made contact to officers of Ops, on the advise submitted fresh proposals, but till the year July,2015 the problems of the complainant could not solve. Complainant is running since 3 years to the different office of the Ops to resolve the dispute but all went in vain for which the complaint before the Forum with prayer that a direction may be given to Ops for refund of Rs.8144/- the premium amounts along with interest and compensation of Rs.20,000/- for mental agony, financial loss and cost of litigation.
3. Being noticed Ops appeared through their Ld. Counsel Mr. Md. Nayeem and filed written version into the proceeding. The written version reveals that complainant proposed herself for a RPLI Policy on dtd.31.03,.2011 with a sum assured of Rs.50,000/- with a monthly premium of Rs.2061/- under Sansarfal Branch Post Office in account with Alba Sub-post office. Considering the sum assured and maturity of age the proposer she has to pay a premium amount of Rs.2061/- at the time of procurement of policy. But the Branch Post Office was collected Rs.2036/- to be payable half yearly. It is averred that due to collection of short premium the proposal was not accepted. On receipt of short premium vide receipt No. 44 dtd. 23.7.2015 (Annexure-R/1) the proposal was accepted on dtd.27.07.15 and assigned the policy number as R.OR-EA-764013 with the commencement of risk from the date of deposit of first premium i.e. dtd.31.03.2011(Annexure R/2). The policy documents are delivered to the complainant on dtd.31.07.2015(Annexure R/4). It is further averred that the Ops are mot deficient in service and the alleged delay occurred due to payment of short premium and complainant has not made any written complaint before the Ops prior to filing of the complaint and the matter of non-receipt of policy documents could have been settled without any legal complicacy. Ops have not willfully delay or harass the complainant, in the circumstances no penalty or compensation to the insurant.
4. Heard the complainant and case of the Ops on merit, considered the documents(Annexures) filed into the proceeding. The admitted facts of the case are that complainant proposed herself for a Rural Postal Life Insurance Policy paid an amount of Rs.2036/- on dtd. 31.03.2011 under Sansarfal branch post office(OP No.1) It is also admitted that complainant was not received the policy bond up to the year June,2015. Ops to substantiate their case pleaded that as the premium amounts deposited by the complainant was ‘short’ her proposal could not accepted and on deposit of the shortfall amount the proposal was accepted and policy was delivered to the complainant. It is to be decided by this Forum that deposit of first premium on dtd.31.03.2011 by the complainant-policy holder and delivery of policy bond in the month of July,2015 can be treated as a deficiency in service on part of the Ops or not ?
Admittedly, the first premium was paid on dtd. 31.03.2011 amounting of Rs.2036/- by the complainant-policy holder before the OP No.1 i.e. Branch Postmaster,Sansarfal Branch post office. Ops, in their written statement submit that due to shortfall on premium the proposal was not accepted and on deposit of shortfall amount the RPLI proposal was accepted and delivered to complainant-policy holder. The pleas of the Ops do not create any impression on us as the shortfall amount was accepted by OP No.1 on dtd.31.03.2011 and allowed the complainant to deposit the said premium amount till November,2012 for 4 nos. of installments as revealed from the photo copies of money receipts produced by the complainant except the money receipt of April,2012. As there was no scope/opportunity left before the complainant-policy holder to ascertain the exact premium amount to be deposited by the complainant-policy holder. It is the duty of the officials of the Ops to intimate and inform the complainant regarding short deposit of premium amount. Further, the officials of the Ops(OP No.1) allowed the complainant-policy holder to deposit the further premium amounts after dtd.31.03.2011 the date of deposit of first premium on different dates as per the complaint petition, where the number of money receipts, date of payments, premium amount are mentioned. The subsequent premium deposits as per the complaint petition is not countered by the Ops, Hence, it is clear that complainant has deposited a total amount of Rs.8144/- as per her prayer before the Ops towards deposit of premium amounts. Now, it isclear that due to negligent functioning of the officials of Ops the said policy could not be delivered to the complainant-policy holder in time. To rectify the mistake and to regularize by accepting the proposal it took more than four years and after filing of the present dispute which according to us is deficiency in service. Because when a complainant like consumer paid a premium, it is legally expected that if there is any wrong filing of proposal form, payment of short premium or any discrepancies same is to complied or intimated promptly either by accepting the proposal or rejecting the same by the Ops. Ops without informing any reason of non-delivery of policy result the complainant-policy holder to discontinued the policy defeated the purpose of taking a policy by a lady. However, the written statement is silent regarding terms and conditions of the policy required for refund of deposited premium amounts. On the other hand, complainant in her complaint prays for refund of deposited premium amount of Rs.8144/- along with interest from the date of deposit to till its realization. She further prays a compensation of Rs.20,000/- for financial loss, mental agony and cost of litigation. In this regard, we opine that the compensation claimed for is on a very higher side, that apart the complainant has not filed any written complaint before the Ops except the oral communication with the officials of Ops which is evident from the Annexure R/1 discloses that the shortfall amount of rs.25/- is deposited on dtd.27.07.15 for the monthly premium period of March,2011.
Having observations reflected above it is directed that on receipt of application/withdrawal by the complainant for refund of premium OPs will release the premium amount of Rs.8144/- along with simple rate of interest calculating from dtd. 24.11.2012 to till its realization. In addition to the aforesaid amount Ops will pay Rs.1000/-(Rupees One thousand)only as cost of litigation. The order is to be complied within one month of receipt of the application/withdrawal form of the complainant, failing which action will be initiated as per the provisions of the C.P.Act.
The complaint is allowed in part on merit with cost.
Pronounced in the open Court, this the 31st day of May,2016.
