Andhra Pradesh

Chittoor-II at triputi

CC/100/2016

Bobba Pushpavathi, W/o. Late B. Sanakara Naidu, aged 65 years - Complainant(s)

Versus

Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, (Anil Dhirubai Ambani Group) - Opp.Party(s)

M. Subrahmanyam

27 Oct 2017

ORDER

         

 

                                                                                                                                                               Filing Date: 03-10-2016                                                                                                                                                                                        Order Date: 11-10-2017

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, CHITTOOR AT TIRUPATI.

Present: - Sri. Ramakrishnaiah, President

                                                                                              Smt. T.Anitha, Member

 

THURSDAY THE TWENTY SIXTH  DAY OF OCTOBER, TWO THOUSAND AND SEVENTEEN

 

C.C.No.100/2016

Between

Smt. Bobba Pushpavathi,

W/o. Late B. Sankara Naidu,

Hindu, aged about 65 years,

Farmer, residing at Nendragunta  Village & Post,

Pakala Mandal, Chittoor District.                                                                … Complainant

 

And

1. Reliance General Insurance Company Limited,

(Anil Dhirubai Ambani Group),

4^th Floor, Sagar Plaza, 4/1/327 to 337,

Abids Road, Hyderabad – 500001.

Rep. by its Claims Manager.

 

2. The District Co-Operative Central Bank Limited,

Kongareddipalle,

Chittoor Post – 517 001

Chittoor District.

Having its Branch at Pakala,

Rep. by its Chief Executive Officer.

 

3. The  Pakala Primary Agricultural

Co-operative Society Limited,

PAKALA Village & Post,

Pakala Mandal, Chittoor District.

Rep. by its Chief Executive Officer.                                         … Opposite parties 

 

         This complaint coming on before us for final hearing on 12.10.2017 and upon perusing the complaint, written arguments of the complainant and other relevant material papers on record and on hearing of Sri.M.Subramanyam Reddy counsel for the complainant and N. RajGopal counsel for the opposite parties 2 and 3 and opposite party no.1 is remained exparte having stood over till this day for consideration, the Forum made the following.

ORDER

DELIVERED BY SMT. T. ANITHA, MEMBER

ON BEHALF OF THE BENCH

        This complaint is filed under Sections- 12 and 14 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, by the complainant complaining the deficiency in service on part of the opposite parties and prayed this Forum to direct the opposite parties  to pay the insurance claim of Rs.1,00,000/- to the complainant together with interest @18% p.a. from the date of claim till the date of realization, directing the opposite parties to pay a compensation of Rs.25,000/- to the complainant for cause of inconvenience, monitory loss, hardship and mental agony by way of deficiency in services and for the inordinate delay in payment of the death claim and to pay Rs.3,500/- towards costs of the complaint.

       2. The brief facts of the case are:   The husband of the complainant who is a farmer and member in the opposite party no.3 organization vide general no.916 and he availed loan for the development of agricultural lands. The opposite party no.3 is affiliated to the opposite party no.2 under single window credit system and financing its members for the development of agriculture. The complainant further stated that the opposite party no.2 has insured the life of the husband of the complainant for Rs.1,00,000/- with the opposite party no.1 vide Reliance Janatha Personal Accident Insurance Policy on 12.04.2008 under policy No. 1811-38-30-11-100004 dt: 12.04.2008 for the year 2008-2009. The complainant husband died in an road accident on 21.05.2008 when the policy is in force and claim was submitted on 19.07.2008 to the opposite party no.3 in the prescribed format for on ward transmission to the opposite party no.1 through opposite party no.2 by the complainant who is the wife and nominee of the insurance claim.

       The opposite party no.2 vide RC No. A3/GJPAI/414/RMC/2010-11 dt: 06.08.2010 reminded the opposite party no.1 to settle  39 pending claims serial no. 10 of the 39 pending claims. After receipt of the reminder also the opposite parties failed to settle the claim of the complainant. After several requests made by the complainant the opposite party no.1 through opposite parties 2 and 3. The opposite party no.1 did not close to settle the claim. Hence she issued legal notice on 19.05.2016 to all opposite parties to settle the claim but even after receipt of the notice they failed to comply the same. Hence she filed the present complaint.

         The opposite party no.1 remained exparte and the opposite parties 2 and 3 filed their written version and in the written version filed by the opposite party no.2 admitted the policy of the complainant’s husband which was taken on 12.04.2008 and further stated that the claim application was received from the opposite party no.3 and the same was forwarded to the opposite party no.1 without delay for the settlement of the claim and same is pending with the opposite party no.1 till today. The matter was also perused several times by them for the settlement of the pending claim. Accordingly was issued one remainder dt:06.08.2010 under vide RC No. A3/GJPAI/414/RNC/2010-2011 to settle the 39 pending claims among those claims the complainant’s claim is stood as serial no.10 in the list submitted to the opposite party no.1. But the opposite party no.1 has not settle the claim of the complainant hence as the claim is pending before the opposite party no.1 as there is no lapse in their part as they have duly forwarded the claim which was received from the opposite party no.3 to opposite party no.1 hence there is no deficiency on service on part of them. Hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed against them.  The opposite party no.2 filed written version and same was adopted by the opposite party no.3.  

       3. The complainant filed her evidence on affidavit and Ex: A1 to A12 were marked on

behalf of her. The complainant filed his written arguments and oral arguments were heard.

       4. Now the points for consideration are:-

              (i)  Whether there is any deficiency in service on part of the opposite parties    

                     towards the complainant?           

             (ii)  Whether the complainant is entitled to the reliefs as prayed for? If so?         

             (iii)  To what Relief?

        5.Point No (i):-    

       6.Point No(ii):- 

        7.Point (iii):-   In view of our discussion on points 1 an 2, we are of the opinion that there is deficiency in service on part of the opposite parties, hence the complaint is to be allowed.

          In the result, the complaint is

         Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by me in the Open Forum this the 26^th day of October, 2017.

          Sd/-                                                                                                                       Sd/-                                                                         

  Lady Member                                                                                                           President

C.C.No.100/2016

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

 

witnesses examined on behalf of complainant/s.

 

PW-1: Smt. B. Pushpavathi (Chief Affidavit filed).                           

                                           

witnesses examined on behalf of opposite party/s.

                                                                             

RW-1: Sri C. Sankara Babu   (Chief Affidavit filed).

RW-2: Sri B. Murali Krishna (Chief Affidavit filed).                         

                                           

 

            EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT/s     

 

Exhibits (Ex.A)	Description of Documents
	Original Pass book for Primary Agricultural Co-Operative Society issued by Opposite Party No.3 is filed by the Complainant.
	Original copy of House Hold Card (Bearing No. PAP104201800285, Date of Issue : 30.09.2006) filed by the Complainant.
	Photo copy of FIR (FIR No.69, Dt: 21.05.2008, Pakala P.S., Chittoor Dt.) filed by the Complainant.
	Photo copy of News Paper clipping filed by the Complainant. Dt: 21.05.2008.
	Photo copy of Post Mortem Report filed by the Complainant. Dt: 21.05.2008.
	Photo copy with attestation of the Death Certificate of the deceased filed by the Complainant. Dt: 09.06.2008.
	Original copy of Family Member Certificate issued by the Mee seva, Govt. of A.P. Dt: 23.06.2016.
	Original copy of Voter Card of the deceased filed by the Complainant. Card No. AP/21/148/282427.
	Copy of Janata Personal Accident Insurance claim form application of Reliance General Insurance Company Limited, Mumbai filed by the Complainant. Dt: 19.07.2008.
	Attested Photo copy of Letter, Dated 06.08.2010 caused by Opposite Party No.2 to opposite Party No.1 filed by the Complainant.
	Office copy of Legal Notice issued to all the opposite parties filed by the complainant. Dt: 19.05.2016.
	Acknowledgements of the opposite parties 1,2 and 3 filed by the Complainant.

 

EXHIBITS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE OPPOSITE PARTY/s

 

-NIL-

 

 

                                                            Sd/-

                                                                                                    President

Copies to:  1) The Complainant, 

                  2) The Opposite parties.

 

// TRUE COPY //

                                                                                                 // BY ORDER //

 

                                                                                         Head Clerk/Sheristadar, 

                                                                                Dist. Consumer Forum-II, Tirupati.