BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH

========

Vandana Sharma w/o Late Sh.Rakesh Sharma, R/o H.No.331/1, Sector 37-A, Chandigarh

…..Complainant

                 V E R S U S

1]  Punjab National Bank, Main Branch Office – PNB House, Sector 17-B, Bank Square, Chandigarh, through its Asstt. General Manager.

2]  Punjab National Bank, Transaction Banking Division, Hon’ble.5, Sansad Marg, New Delhi 110001, through its Asstt. General Manager.

                      ……Opposite Parties

CORAM:   P.L. AHUJA                    PRESIDENT

RAJINDER  SINGH  GILL            MEMBER

Argued by:    Sh.G.D.Gupta, Counsel for the complainant.

Ms.Sahlini, Counsel for the OPs.

PER RAJINDER SINGH GILL, MEMBER

         As averred, Late Sh.Rakesh Sharma, deceased husband of the complainant, holding a Saving Bank Account with OP No.1 (Ann.C-1) and enjoying Debit Card & ATM Card Facility against it (Ann.C-2), died in a motor accident on 28.6.2010.  He was taken to Sri Guru Harkishan Hospital, Sohana, but did not survive. An F.I.R. NO.61, dated 2.7.2010 was registered with P.S.Sohana (Ann.C-3).  The Death Certificate has been annexed as Ann.C-4. The intimation about the death of Sh.Rakesh Sharma was given to OP-1.

         It is asserted that the deceased, husband of the complainant, was covered under a Personal Accident Insurance Benefit Scheme of OP Bank to the extent of Rs.2.00 lacs. This insurance benefit was available to all PNB Debit Card Holders.  The risk under the said Scheme was commenced from the date of issuance of debit card with no expiry date or period (Ann.C-5). Thereafter, complainant, being the wife of the deceased and beneficiary of the insurance cover, lodged a claim with OPs followed by e-mails (*Ann.C-9 to C-11), which they repudiated vide Ann.C-12 stating therein that no such scheme was applicable to the deceased husband at the time of his death by accident. Alleging the said repudiation as illegal, arbitrary and deficiency in service on the part of OPs, the present complaint has been instituted. 

2]       OPs filed joint reply and admitted the factual matrix of the case.  It is stated that as per the statement of deceased’s father under Section 174 Cr.P.C., mentioned in the F.I.R. dated 02.07.2010, Mr.Rakesh Sharma succumbed to natural death.  It is also stated that since the accident was not the direct cause of death, hence there is no claim liability on the OPs. 

         It is pleaded that the bank unlike any other business organization launches some promotional schemes for promotion of some of its product, which are for specified period and not permanent in nature.  It is also pleaded that no intimation of death of the account holder was given to the bank immediately after death, as alleged.  It is submitted that the complainant knowing the fact of non-eligibility is trying to mislead the Forum by referring various documents gathered from different sources whether relevant or not. The complainant through present complaint has raised a claim of Rs.2.00 lacs whereas Ann.C-13 to the complaint states the free accidental insurance coverage of Rs.50,000/- which proves that the complainant gathered the documents related to different promotional schemes brought from time to time and used them to support the crooked claim petition.  Pleading no deficiency in service on their part, the OPs have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3]       Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

4]       We have heard the ld.Counsel for the parties and have perused the record.

5]       Admittedly, Sh.Rakesh Sharma, the deceased husband of complainant, was account holder with OP Bank as well as holding ATM-cum-Debit Card.

6]       The contention of the complainant is that her deceased husband, who was covered under a Personal Accident Insurance Benefit Scheme of OP Bank to the extent of Rs.2.00 lacs, being the holder of ATM-cum-Debit Card, died in a motor accident on 28.6.2010.  An F.I.R. (Ann.C-3) about the said accident was also registered.  The main contention of the complainant is that when she filed a claim with the OP bank seeking accidental death benefit of her husband being insured, the same was illegally repudiated on the ground that no such scheme was applicable to the husband at the time of his death by accident.

7]       On the other hand, the contention of the OPs is that Sh.Rakesh Sharma, deceased succumbed to natural death and the accident was not the direct cause of death.  It is also contended that at the time of accident in June, 2010 there was no any accidental death insurance scheme for Debit Card holders was available, so the repudiation was rightly done.

8]       We do not find any merit in the contention of the OPs.  The copy of F.I.R. No.61, dated 02.07.2010 (Ann.C-3) proves that the deceased Rakesh Sharma met with an accident on 28.6.2010 and sustained multiple injuries on his person. The Death Certificate Ann.C-4 proves that Sh.Rakesh Sharma succumbed to his injuries at Multi-specialty Wing, Sohana on 28.6.2010 i.e. the same day of the said accident.  Hence, the plea of the OPs that the deceased died as a result of natural death is untenable. 

9]       Annexure C-5 is the photocopy of Know Your PNB Debit Card. At page No.7 of this document under the Colum of INSURANCE BENEFIT, it has specifically been mentioned to the following effect:-

         “INSURANCE BENEFIT

    Free personal accidental insurance cover of Rs.2.00 lacs is available to all the PNB Debit cardholders.

    By the virtue of having a PNB debit card you are automatically covered with personal accidental insurance of Rs.2.00 lacs”

Scope of insurance cover

    Scope shall……..

Persons covered:

    All PNB Debit cardholders are covered in the scheme till they maintain their account with the bank and hold a valid PNB debit Card.

10]      From the above document as well as column, it has proved that the personal accidental insurance cover of Rs.2.00 lacs was available to all PNB Debit Cardholder and by virtue of having a PNB Card, the cardholder was automatically covered with said insurance of Rs.2.00 lacs.  Moreover, in the terms & conditions, at Page No.13, there is no mention of termination or cancellation of said insurance cover available to all PNB Debit Card Holders. 

11]      It is not disputed that the deceased Rakesh Sharma was having ATM-cum-Debit Card of PNB/OP Bank and was maintaining his account with said bank while holding valid PNB Debit Card till the time of his death. 

12]      The ground taken by the OPs for repudiating the claim of the complainant, sent through e-mail (Page NO.49) stating that at the time of accident in June, 2010, there was no any accidental death insurance scheme for Debit Card Holders was available, is totally vague, misconceived and without any substance. The OPs have not been able to place on record any cogent & documentary proof, to substantiate their ground of repudiation.  It is a mere bald assertion of the OPs, which cannot be believed.  Moreover, the OPs have not placed on record any letter or communication, ever written/sent to its Debit Card holders informing them about the termination of said personal accidental insurance cover, which otherwise was automatically available to all PNB Debit Card holders to the tune of Rs.2.00 lacs. Hence, the repudiation is held to unjustified and illegal.

13]      We also put reliance on Inder Prabha Garg Vs. The Manager, The Hong Kong and Shanghais Banking, 2008(1) CLT 246 of our own State Commission, U.T., Chandigarh, wherein it has been held that:-

“Credit Card – Credit card insurance benefit - Denial of Accidental Insurance benefit provided on credit card…………….Since the card was issued by HSBC who is the service provider to the consumer complainant the liability could be fastened only on the HSBC – OPs 1 and 2 are not only deficient in service rendered to the consumer but also are guilty of unfair trade practice as well….”

14]      In view of the above discussion, findings as well as the cited law, we are of the firm opinion that the deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice on the part of OPs is writ large. Therefore, the complaint must succeed.  The same is accordingly allowed.  The OPs are directed to pay the sum assured amount of Rs.2.00 lacs to the complainant being the personal accidental insurance cover/death benefit of her deceased husband Sh.Rakesh Sharma.  The OPs are also directed to pay a compensation of Rs.50,000/- to the complainant for causing her mental & physical harassment on account of their deficient act, apart from paying litigation expenses of Rs.15,000/-.

         This order be complied with by the OPs within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which they shall be liable to refund the above awarded amount of Rs.2,50,000/- (Rs.2.00 lacs plus Rs.50,000/-) along with interest @12% p.a. from the date of filing this complaint i.e. 29.6.2012 till its actual payment to the complainant, besides paying litigation costs, as aforesaid.

         Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of cost.  The file be consigned.