DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, NARNAUL
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.133 of 2011
DATE OF INSTITUTION:- 26.04.2011
DATE OF ORDER:-26 .03.2015
Smt. Saroj Devi widow of Shri Narain Dass, Mother of Late Vishnu Dutt @ Bablu, Resident of Mohalla Misharwara, Narnaul, Tehsil Narnaul
……………COMPLAINANT
VERSUS
- Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd. Command Office Sahara India Bhawan 1, Kapurthala Complex, Lucknow through Managing Director
- Sahara India Parivar, Branch Opposite Subhash Park, Singhana Road, Narnaul through Branch Manager
- National Insurance Company Ltd. Divisional Office IV at 43, Jeevan Bhawan, Hazratganj, Lucknow through Divisional Manager
………….. OPPOSITE PARTIES
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT
BEFORE :- Rajesh Jindal, President
Smt. Usha Yadav, Member
L.K. Nandwani, Member
Present:- Shri R. K. Sanghi, Advocate for the complainant.
Shri R. K. Chaudhary, Advocate for opposite parties No.1 and 2
Shri Udai Singh, Advocate for opposite party No.3
ORDER:-
Rajesh Jindal, President:
According to the complaint, brief facts are that the complainant’s son Vishnu Dutt @ Bablu had obtained a Scheme “Sahara Rajat Yojna” from the opposite parties and paid Rs.10,000/- at Narnaul vide application No.333028316860 dated 18.02.2005, 1st receipt No.010147490337, Control No.21149204683 with the opposite parties and the complainant was appointed as nominee under the said scheme. The complainant has alleged that the opposite parties have issued a Pass Book No.24300 in favour of her son by mentioning the details of payable amount on advance deposited amount of Rs.10,000/- and the payable insured amount, in case of death of policy holder. The complainant has averred that her son Vishnu Dutt @ Bablu died on 13.12.2007 in a vehicular accident within the revenue estate of Nangal Chaudhary Road, Narnaul and in this regard FIR No.454 dated 14.12.2007 under Sections 279/304-A IPC was lodged with police station City Narnaul. Post-mortem on the dead body of complainant’s son was conducted vide P.M.R. No.DP44/07 dated 14.12.2007 in General Hospital, Narnaul. The opposite parties got appended the signatures of the complainant on some forms and papers without reading. The complainant submitted the required documents viz. FIR, PMR, death certificate, Ration card, Pass book etc. with the opposite parties. Thereafter, in October 2008 the complainant again submitted the required documents with the opposite parties. The complainant requested the opposite parties several times to pay the maturity amount of Rs.17,240/- and insured amount of Rs.1,00,000/-, but to no effect. The complainant has prayed that the opposite parties be directed to pay the maturity amount of Rs.17,240/- and to pay insured amount of Rs.1,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 24% per annum, besides claiming compensation for mental agony and harassment and litigation expenses.
2. Opposite parties No.1 and 2 filed joint reply admitting that Vishnu Dutt had deposited Rs.10,000/- on 18.02.2005 under the scheme “Sahara Rajat Yojna” and the complainant was nominated as nominee. They have also admitted the death of Vishnu Dutt. The complainant has not submitted the required documents within 30 days, rather deposited after a long time and on receipt of said required documents from the complainant, the same were sent to National Insurance Company without any delay on 04.06.2008. The complainant’s claim was sent to National Insurance Company for settlement and its intimation was given to the complainant by the opposite parties No.1 and 2. It is averred that opposite parties No.1 and 2 sent letters dated 09.05.2011 and 18.06.2011 to the Insurance Company for settlement of complainant’s claim, but no reply was received from the insurance company and entire liability to settle the claim of the complainant is of the insurance company. Opposite parties No.1 and 2 have taken a comprehensive group insurance policy from the insurance company for making the payment of death claim to the nominee of advance booking holder under ‘Sahara Rajat Yojna’. The answering opposite parties themselves are not issuing any insurance policy. It is averred that as per rule 19 of the Scheme, the benefits of insurance is to be paid after completing the terms and conditions of the comprehensive policy taken from the insurance company. The terms and conditions of the scheme were read over and explained to deceased Vishnu Dutt before depositing Rs.10,000/-. Rests of the allegations as alleged in the complaint are denied. There is no deficiency in service on the part of answering opposite parties. It is prayed that the complaint be dismissed with costs.
3. Opposite party No.3 filed separate reply averring that it has given the contingency policy to Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd. to cover their investors as per terms and conditions of the policy. Since the complainant or Sahara India Commercial Corporation has not given intimation of death of the investor under the policy within the stipulated period and as such the answering opposite party is not liable to pay compensation, as alleged. It is further submitted that the complainant or Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd. has not submitted the relevant and necessary documents i.e. copy of policy, copy of investment certificate, death certificate of insured, copy of FIR, copy of MLR within one month from the date of accident, as per terms and conditions of the policy. Opposite party No.1 has not accepted the proposal dated 08.02.2005 sent by the Sahara India Pariwar and written a letter dated 07.03.2005 in this regard to Sahara India Pariwar because at the time of proposal of insurance of the policy only coverage of Table “I” was provided. Sahara India acknowledged the letter dated 07.03.2005 of answering opposite party through their letter dated 11.03.2005. In the end, it is prayed that the complaint be dismissed with special costs.
4. In order to make out her case, the complainant has placed on record her own supporting affidavit Annexure C-1, copy of FIR No.454 dated 14.12.2007 Annexure C-2, copy of PMR Annexure C-3, copy of Ration Card Annexure C-4, copy of death certificate Annexure C-5 and copy of Receipt/application No.333028316860 Annexure C-6.
5. In reply thereto, opposite parties No.1 and 2 have placed on record copies of application forms Annexures R-1 & R-2, copy of letter dated 04.06.2008 Annexure R-3, copy of letter dated 09.05.2011 Annexure R-4, copy of letter dated 18.06.2011 Annexure R-5, copy of Schedule Annexure R-6, copy of Special Contingency Policy Annexure R-7, copy of Group Accidental Policy Annexure R-8, copy of letter dated 14.07.2006 Annexure R-9, copy of letter dated 07.03.2005 Annexure R-10, copy of letter dated 08.02.2005 Annexure R-11, copy of letter dated 11.03.2005 Annexure R-12, copies of cheques Annexures R-13 to R-18, copy of order dated 04.01.2013 passed by the District Forum Nalanda Annexure R-19, copy of judgment passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India cited as (1979) 4 Supreme Court Cases 176 Annexure R-20, copy of Order dated 28.09.2011 passed by Hon’ble State Commission, Chhattisgarh, Pandri, Rajpur Annexure R-21, copy of Order dated 03.11.2009 passed by Hon’ble National Commission, New Delhi in case Road Safety Club Pvt. Ltd. Versus Smt. Kodi Lakshmi Narayanamma & Others First Appeal No.191 of 2009 Annexure R-22, copy of Order dated 21.01.2010 passed by the Hon’ble State Commission, Hyderabad in F.A. No.850 of 2007 Annexure R-23, copy of Order dated 05.12.2009 passed by Hon’ble State Commission, Hyderabad in F.A. No.797 of 2007 Annexure R-24, copy of ruling cited as 1 (2009) CPJ 264 Annexure R-25, copy of Order dated 26.03.2012 passed by our own Hon’ble State Commission, Haryana, Panchkula in First Appeal No.1501 of 2010 Annexure R-26, copy of Circular dated 20.09.2011 Annexure R-27, copy of reply Annexure R-28, copy of letter dated 21.04.2008 Annexure R-29, copy of letter dated 04.06.2008 Annexure R-30, copy of letter dated 17.07.2008 Annexure R-31, copy of letter dated 09.05.2011 Annexure R-32, copy of letter dated 18.06.2011 Annexure R-33, copies of application forms Annexures R-34 to R-36, copy of Schedule Annexure R-37 and copies of several other documents from Annexures R-38 to R-56.
6. Opposite party No.3 has placed on record copy of letter dated 08.02.2005 Annexure R-57, copy of letter dated 07.03.2005 Annexure R-58, copy of letter dated 11.03.2005 Annexure R-59, copy of letter dated 17.07.2008 Annexure R-60 and copy of letter dated 18.06.2011 Annexure R-61.
7. We have examined the entire material on record and given the thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced before us. Indisputably, Vishnu Dutt @ Bablu, the son of the complainant, invested Rs.10,000/- with opposite parties No.1 and 2 on 18.02.2005 under the scheme of “Sahara Rajat Yojna”. The said son of the complainant expired on 13.12.2007 in a motor accident. According to the complainant, her son was expired after 2 years, but before 3 years from the date of deposit; hence, as per the scheme of opposite parties No.1 and 2, an insurance cover on the life of the son of the complainant was for Rs.1,00,000/-.
8. According to opposite party No.1, it has taken comprehensive policy from opposite party No.3 for all its investors, which has also been admitted by opposite party No.3 and it has sent all the documents to opposite party No.3 for settlement of claim of the complainant. According to the contention of opposite parties No.1 and 2, the said claim is still pending with opposite party No.3. According to opposite party No.3 a reference to the correspondence between opposite parties No.1 and 3, the son of the complainant has a insurance cover of Rs.50,000/- only. However, opposite parties No.1 and 2 have not denied in their pleadings that the insurance cover of Rs.1,00,000/- was not available to the son of the complainant.
9. From the pleadings of the parties, it is manifest that the claim of the complainant is still pending and the opposite parties have not settled the claim of the complainant, which was lodged by the complainant about 7 years back, it amounts to gross deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.
10. Further, the complainant has contended that the maturity amount of Rs.17,240/- against the deposit of Rs.10,000/- on 18.02.2005, became due on 18.02.2011; hence also not been paid by opposite parties No.1 and 2 to the complainant.
11. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions of the parties, we allow the complaint of the complainant.
It is ordered that:-
- Opposite parties No.1 and 2 shall pay the maturity value of Rs.17,240/- to the complainant along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum w.e.f. 18.02.2011 till the date of payment
- The opposite parties, jointly and severally, shall pay Rs.1,00,000/- to the complainant along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint i.e. 26.04.2011 till the date of payment.
No order as to cost.
Announced:-
26.03.2015
(Smt. Usha Yadav) (L. K. Nandwani) (Rajesh Jindal)
Member Member President,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Narnaul
