West Bengal

Uttar Dinajpur

CC/14/69

Smt.Hemabati Mandal - Complainant(s)

Versus

Reliance Life Insurance Co. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Chandan Sarkar

29 Oct 2014

ORDER

Before the Honorable
Uttar Dinajpur Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
Super Market Complex, Block 1 , 1st Floor.
 
Complaint Case No. CC/14/69
 
1. Smt.Hemabati Mandal
Kalomatia,Soyed Pur, Itahar,
Uttar Dinajpur
West Bengal
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. Reliance Life Insurance Co. Ltd.
Represented by the Branch Manager,16R.N Mukhertjee Road,3rd. Floor,Dalhoushi,Kolkata-1
West Bengal
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

This is a complaint U/S 12, of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with the prayer for an order directing the O.Ps. to pay sum assured amount of Rs.50,000/- with interest, compensation of Rs.35,000/-, Rs.5,000/- as litigation cost and other reliefs to the complainant.

The complainant’s case in short is that the deceased husband of the complainant, Ujjal Mandal during his life time purchased an insurance policy bearing No. K0955762 on 09.02.2009, sum assured of Rs.50,000/-. Said Ujjal Mandal was died on 24.10.2010 and at the time of his death the said policy was in force. After death of the said policy holder, the complainant as a nominee of the said policy informed the matter and submitted the claim form to the O.P. No.3 along with all necessary documents and thereafter several times she went to the O.P.’s office to get the death claim but in vain. So, for deficiency in providing service on the part of the O.Ps. the complainant was forced to file this complaint before this Forum with prayer as mentioned above.

 

It appears from the record that as per order dated 29.08.2014 the name of the O.P. No.1 was expunged on petition filed by the complainant. It also appears from the record that the O.P. No.2 and 3 being noticed did not appeared and contest this case by filing W.V. and appearing on date of hearing. So, this case was heard ex-parte against them.

 

To establish the complainant’s case the complainant has relied upon an affidavit-in-chief sworn by her upon some documents and upon her own statement recorded as statement of P.W.1.

 

DECISIONS WITH REASONS

 

The complainant has submitted a bunch of documents which are (1) copy of policy certificate, (2) copy of premium receipts and (3) copy of death certificate to establish her case. Let us see how for the complainant has able to prove her case.

 

It find from the documentary evidence on record that the husband of the complainant, during his life time was a policy holder under the O.Ps. and at the time of his death the said policy was in force . The policy holder was died on 24.10.2010. The name of the complainant is mentioned in the said policy as nominee. But there is no any document in record which shows that after the death of the deceased policy holder the complainant submitted claim form or any corresponding documents regarding the death benefit to the O.Ps.. Although she made in her content of complaint that after the death of her husband she submitted the claim form before the O.Ps. and for collecting the death benefit she lastly corresponds with the O.Ps. on 25.10.2012. We find that the content of complaint petition of the complainant is supported by the affidavit-in-chief has been submitted by the complainant before this Forum.

 

Moreover, it is needless to say the O.Ps. against whom the relief she claimed has not turned up in spite of the fact that the notice of this case has duly been served on it. It is expected as a responsible Semi-Government organization, it should pay heed its clients’ grievance and should submit, if any, its own version regarding claim of the complainant by appearing before this Forum. But the O.Ps did not do so in this case. However, the evidences adduced by the complainant are supporting her case. We find nothing to disbelieve the evidence adduced as the same have not been challenged. It is essential to mention that the documentary evidence and the oral evidence as mentioned are corroborating by each other. So, in our opinion the complainant has been able to make out a prima-facie case to get an order in her favour as per her prayer.

 

Accordingly the case succeeds.

 

Fees paid is correct.

 

Hence, it is

                                      ORDERED

 

that the complaint case being No. CC-69/2014 is allowed ex-parte against the O.Ps. without cost.

 

That the complainant do get an award directing the O.Ps. to pay sum assured of Rs.50,000/-, Rs.1,000/- as compensation and Rs.1,000/- as litigation cost and the O.Ps. are directed to pay the entire awarded amount of Rs.52,000/- (Rupees Fifty Two Thousand) only to the complainant within one month from this day, failing which the awarded amount will carry interest @ 8% per annum from the date of filing of this complaint till the date of full realization of the same and the complainant will be at liberty to put this order in execution in accordance with law.

 

Let the copy of this order be supplied to the parties each free of cost.

 

 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.