Per Sri A. Hazarath Rao,  President:-
The complainant filed this complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act seeking the insured amount of Rs.1,00,000/-; damages of Rs.50,000/- and costs of Rs.10,000/-.

2.   In brief the averments of the complaint are these:
One Garlapati Bikshalu on 08-06-09 purchased Hero Honda passion plus AP07 AT 8788 from the 1st opposite party.   At the time of purchase, the 1st opposite party provided Hero Honda good life scheme offer promoted by the 2nd opposite party.   The 2nd opposite party issued certificate of insurance to the complainant.  The said policy covered loss of life due to an accident under group personal accident policy bearing No.35180/42/09/820000002 for a period of three years.   The assured amount was Rs.1,00,000/-.   The said Bikshalu and another Palakayala Kaleswara Rao on 23-09-09 were going on the said vehicle from Mangalagiri  towards Koppulukonda.  The lorry bearing No.AP 7T 2529 came speedily in opposite direction and dashed against them, resulting the death of both i.e., the insured and the said Kaleswara Rao on the spot besides causing damage to the said two wheeler.   The complainant being legal heir of the insured approached the opposite parties many a time and requested for payment of the assured amount.   But the opposite parties did not respond.   The complainant on 01-04-10 got issued a registered legal notice for which the 2nd opposite party on 20-04-10 gave reply requiring her to send certain documents.  The complainant sent those documents immediately.    Inspite of sending documents there was no response from the opposite parties.   Thus the attitude of the opposite parties amounted to deficiency of service.   The attitude of the opposite parties put the complainant to mental agony.   The complaint therefore be allowed.

3. The contention of the 1st opposite party in brief is thus:
This Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint as the opposite parties were situated at Vijayawada and Delhi.  The complaint was barred by time as the complaint died on 23-09-09. The 1st opposite party forwarded the insurance policy to the complainant soon after it received from the 2nd opposite party.  The 1st opposite party has nothing to do with payment of insured amount.  The 1st opposite party did not commit any deficiency of service.   The complaint therefore be dismissed.

4. The contention of the 2nd opposite party in brief is thus:
The complaint was barred by time as not filed within two years from the date of death of the insured.   The insurance policy covered the death arising out of accident.  The 2nd opposite party on 20-04-12 gave a reply to the complainant’s counsel.   For any claim on account of accidental death claim form duly completed by the nominee, PM report, Inquest, FIR, and death certificate are necessary.  In the absence of such documents the 2nd opposite party will not be in a position to process the claim.  The complaint has not submitted claim form along with the above mentioned documents.    The insured did not posses valid and effective driving license at the time of accident.    The 2nd opposite party did not commit any deficiency of service.   The complaint therefore be dismissed.     

5.  Exs.A-1 to A-19 were marked on behalf of complainant.  No documents were marked on behalf of the opposite parties.

6. Now the points that arose for consideration in this case are:
1. Whether the complaint is barred by time?
2. Whether this Forum has territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint?
3. Whether the opposite parties committed deficiency of service and if so by whom?
4. Whether the complainant is entitled to compensation and if so to what amount and from whom?
5. To what relief?

7.  Admitted facts in this case are these:

a. The complainant on 08-06-09 purchased Hero Honda motor      cycle from the 1st opposite party for Rs.49,289/- (Ex.A-1).
b. The 2nd opposite party issued insurance policy in favour of the complainant and the said policy was valid from                    24-09-09 to 23-09-12 (Ex.A-5).
c. The insured died on 23-09-09 due to accident (Ex.A-11,                  A-12, A-13 and A-6).  
d.   The complainant got issued a notice to the opposite parties on 01-04-10 (Ex.A-7, A-9).
e.  The 2nd opposite party gave a reply on 20-04-10 (Ex.A-10).

8.   POINT No.2:-   A complaint can be filed at a place where cause of action arose partly or wholly as per section 11 (2) (c) of the Consumer Protection Act.   Unless death of the insured takes place no claim can be made.  Since the death took place at Perecherla village situated within the jurisdiction of this Forum we opine that this Forum has jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.   We therefore answer this point in favour of the complainant.

9.  POINT No.1:-     The complainant filed this complaint on 12-04-12 after receipt of Ex.A-10 reply from the 2nd opposite party.  Under     Ex.A-10   the 2nd opposite party required the complainant to submit the documents mentioned therein.   It is the contention of the complainant that she sent the documents mentioned in Ex.A-10 immediately.  It can therefore be said that the claim is pending from 20-04-10.  Therefore we opine that the complaint is in time and answer this point in favour of the complainant.

10.   POINTS 3 & 4:   Under Ex.A-10 the 2nd opposite party advised the complainant to send the documents namely:
1. Enclosed claim form duly completed by the nominee.
2. Original passport/copy of passport
3. Post mortem report, duly attested
4. Inquest report, duly attested
5. Copy of FIR, duly attested
6. Copy of death certificate, duly attested.   If in regional language, then English translation.
7. Copy of Bank passbook with account number elicited there of the nominee

11. The complainant in her complaint and affidavit mentioned that she sent the required documents immediately which the 2nd opposite party vehemently denied.   Burden is on the complainant to prove that she sent those documents to the 2nd opposite party.  The complainant did not place any material before this Forum to prove the said contention.   Any insurance policy is a beneficial one.   As the complainant filed this complaint in time disposing off this case with a direction to the complainant to send the documents referred to in Ex.A-10 to Result Maccann (Hero Honda Passport Pragramme) 8, Balaji Estate, Guru Ravidas Marg. Kalkaji, New Delhi-110019 and also to the 2nd opposite party and inturn directing the 2nd opposite party to process the claim will meet ends of justice.  We therefore answer these points accordingly.

12. POINT No.5:-   In view of above findings in the result the complaint was disposed off with the following directions:
1. The complainant is directed to send the documents referred to in Ex.A-1 to the addressee mentioned therein and also to the 2nd opposite party under proper acknowledgement within two weeks from the date of receipt of this order.
2. The 2nd opposite party is directed to process the claim within four weeks after the receipt of documents mentioned in clause No.1.
3. Both parties shall bear their own costs.

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Complainant:

For opposite parties :    NIL  

        PRESIDENT