BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM: KURNOOL

Present: Sri. T.Sundara Ramaiah, B.Com B.L., President

And

Sri. M.Krishna Reddy, M.Sc., M.Phil., Male Member

And

         Smt. S.Nazeerunnisa, B.A., B.L., Lady Member

Thursday the 27^th day of October, 2011

C.C.No.86/2011

Between:

1. M.Padma, W/o Late M.Jayakumar,

  H.No.2-4, Main Street, A.M.Puram Village,Satyavedu Mandal, Chittor District.

2. M.Jahnavi, D/o Late M.Jayakumar,Aged about 5 years, Minor,Rep.by her Mother M.Padma,

H.No.2-4, Main Street, A.M.Puram Village, Satyavedu Mandal, Chittor District.

3. M.Spoorthy, D/o Late M.Jayakumar, Age d about 3 years, Minor,

  Rep.by her Mother M.Padma,

H.No.2-4, Main Street, A.M.Puram Village, Satyavedu Mandal,Chittor District.                      

  …Complainants

                                           -Vs-

1. SBI Life Insurance Company Limited,Central Processing Center, Rep. by its Managing Director,

   Plot No.3-A, Sector 10, CBD Belapur,Navi Mumbai - 400 614.

2. SBI Life Insurance Company Limited,Central Processing Center,Rep. by its Branch Manager,

   H.No.40-581-A, 2^nd Floor, S.V. Complex, Kurnool – 518 001.                  ...Opposite ParTies

This complaint is coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri M.Sivaji Rao, Advocate for complainant and Sri M.Syam Kumar Reddy, Advocate for opposite parties 1 and 2 and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following.

                                               ORDER

                  (As per Sri. T.Sundara Ramaiah, President)

                                         C.C. No.86/2011

1.     This complaint is filed under section 11 and 12 of C. P. Act, 1986 praying:-

1. To direct the opposite parties jointly and severally to pay the assured amount of Rs.15,00,000/- with accident benefits and with interest at the rate of 24% from the date of death;

1. To pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards the compensation for causing mental agony and hardship;

1. To pay the costs of this complaint;

1. To pass any other order or orders that are deem to the fit and proper circumstances of the case.                           

2.    The case of the complainant in brief is as under:- The first complainant is the wife and complainant 2 and 3 are the minor children of the deceased M.Jaya Kumar.   M.Jaya Kumar on 14-11-2008 took the policy bearing No.24064143804 from the opposite parties.   As per the terms and conditions of the policy, in case of accidental death the nominee is entitled to get double to assured amount i.e., Rs.15,00,000/-.  The premium payable on the policy is Rs.50,000/- per annum.  On 08-05-2010 while the insured was going to Nandyal from Bethamcherla he met with a road accident and died on the spot.  Banaganapalli Police registered a case in Crime No.83/2010 under section 304 A of I.P.C. against the driver of the tractor.  Thereafter the complainant being the nominee submitted the claim to the opposite parties along with required documents.  The opposite parties did not settle the claim inspite of repeated request.  There is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties.   Hence the complaint.

3.     Opposite party No.1 filed written version and the same is adopted by opposite party No.2.  It is stated in the written version of opposite party No.1 that M.Jaya Kumar was insured under the policy for a basic sum assured of Rs.7,50,000/- and an accident benefit rider of Rs.7,50,000/-.  The commencement of the policy is 14-11-2008.  The policy holder expired on 08-05-2010.  An amount of Rs.948/- was deducted from the claim amount towards mortality charges.  Only an amount of Rs.14,99,052/- is payable under the policy.   The V Additional District judge, Tirupati directed the opposite party No.1 not to disburse the amount under the policy.  Hence the payment is kept in abeyance.  The complainant is also a party to the said petition.  The opposite party No.1 is ready and willing to pay sum assured amount of Rs.14,99,052/- to the legal heirs of the deceased M.Jaya Kumar.   The payment is not made as the matter is sub judice before the V Additional District judge, Tirupati.   There is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties.  The compliant is liable to be dismissed.

4.     On behalf of the complainant Ex.A1 to A8 are marked and sworn affidavit of the first complainant is filed.  On behalf of the opposite parties 1 and 2 Ex.B1 and B2 are marked and sworn affidavit of opposite party No.1 is filed.

5.     Both sides filed written arguments.

6.     The points that arise for consideration are:

1. Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of Opposite Parties?

1. Whether the complainants are entitled to the reliefs as prayed for?

1. To what reliefs?

7.      POINT No.1:- Admittedly M.Jaya Kumar is the husband of the first complainant and father of complainants 2 and 3. He obtained policy bearing No.24064143804 from the opposite parties.  The said policy commenced on 14-11-2008. The premium payable under the policy is 14^th November every year. Under the said policy the sum assured is Rs.7,50,000/- with an accident benefit rider of Rs.7,50,000/-.  There is no dispute about the issuance of the said policy in favour of M.Jaya Kumar by the opposite parties. 

8.     It is the case of the complainant that M.Jaya Kumar died on 08-05-2010 in Motor Accident.  The complainants filed Ex.A3 to Ex.A7 in support of their contention that the policy holder died on 08-05-2010.  The opposite party No.1 also in its written version admitted that the policy holder expired on 08-05-2010.   Admittedly after the death of M.Jaya Kumar the first complainant submitted claim to the opposite parties along with documents.  As the opposite parties have not settled the claim the complainants preferred the present complaint.  It is the contention of the opposite parties that M.Govindamma filed succession of O.P.No.306/2010 on the file V Additional District judge, Tirupati and that the V Additional District judge, Tirupati directed the opposite parties not to disburse the amount payable under the policy.  Opposite parties filed Ex.B1 copy of petition in O.P.No.306/2010 and also the order of the V Additional District judge, Tirupati in I.A.No.781/2010.  As seen from Ex.B1 it is very clear that M.Govindamma mother of M.Jaya Kumar filed succession O.P. against opposite party and got attached 1/4^th of the amount i.e., Rs.3,75,000/- out of Rs.15,00,000/-.  There is no mention in the order of V Additional District judge, Tirupati directing the opposite parties not to disburse the balance amount payable under the policy.  Nothing prevented opposite parties from paying the balance amount to the complainants.  The contention of the opposite parties that they are directed by the court not to disburse amount payable under the policy is not correct.  Merely because succession O.P. filed by the mother of the opposite party is pending on the file of V Additional District judge, Tirupati it cannot be said that the petitioners are not entitled to the amount for which they are legally entitled.  The mother of the deceased is entitled only 1/4^th of the assured amount being the class one heir.   The first complainant who is the wife and complainants 2 and 3 minor childrens of the deceased are entitled each 1/4^th share in the assured amount.  There is negligence on the part of opposite party No.1 in settling the claim of the complainants. The complainants 1 to 3 are entitled 1/4^th share each out of Rs.14,99,052/-. 

9.     In the result, the complaint is partly allowed directing the opposite parties 1 and 2 jointly and severally to pay an amount of Rs.3,74,684/- to the first complainant and deposit an amount of Rs.7,49,368/- belonging to the minor complainants 2 and 3 in this Forum within one month from the date of this order.  On such deposit the amount of Rs.7,49,368/- shall be deposited in any nationalized Bank till the complainants 2 and 3 who are minors attain the age of majority.  The complainants 2 and 3 are at liberty to withdraw the matured amount on attaining the age of majority.

        Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open bench on this the 27^th day of October, 2011.

Sd/-                                    Sd/-                                   Sd/-

MALE MEMBER                     PRESIDENT                 LADY MEMBER

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE                                                                                                                       Witnesses Examined

For the complainants : Nill            For the opposite parties : Nill

List of exhibits marked for the complainants :-

Ex.A1        Photo copy of Proposal Deposit receipt of SBI Life Insurance Company Limited, Kurnool, dated 12-11-2008.

Ex.A2.       Photo copy of First Premium Receipt dated 14-11-2008.

Ex.A3                Photo copy of F.I.R. No.83/2010 of Banaganapalli

Police Station, dated 08-05-2010.

Ex.A4        Photo copy of Inquest Report dated 08-05-2010.

Ex.A5                Photo copy of Death Certificate issued by Panchayat

                Secretary A.M.Puram @ Rajugunta Sathvedu Mandal,

                Chittur District dated 22-10-2010.

Ex.A6        Photo copy of Post Mortem Certificate issued by Civil Assistant Surgeon Community Health Center, Banaganapalli, dated 08-05-2010.

Ex.A7        Photo copy of Charge Sheet filed in Crime No.83/2010 Banaganapalli Police Station.

Ex.A8        Photo copy of Family Members Certificate issued by Thasildar Satyavedu Mandal, dated 25-02-2011.

List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties:-

Ex.B1                Photo copy of petition filed In the Court of the V Additional

District Judge, Tirupati, dated 02-07-2010 along

with notice.

Ex.B2                Office copy of S.B.I. Life Insurance Company Limited,

                Mumbai along with policy documents.

 Sd/-                                             Sd/-                                   Sd/-

MALE MEMBER                 PRESIDENT                   LADY MEMBER

    // Certified free copy communicated under Rule 4 (10) of the A.P.S.C.D.R.C. Rules, 1987//

Copy to:-

Complainant and Opposite parties  :

Copy was made ready on             :

Copy was dispatched on               :