Punjab

Faridkot

CC/17/276

Harbans Kaur - Complainant(s)

Versus

SBI Life Insurance Company - Opp.Party(s)

Rajwinder Kaur

02 Jan 2019

ORDER

 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FARIDKOT

CC No.              :    276 of 2017

Date of Institution:    18.08.2017

Date of Decision :       2.01.2019

 

Harbans Kaur aged about 45 years, w/o Jagdev Singh s/o Gurdeep Singh r/o Heera Singh Nagar, Kotkapura, District Faridkot.

...Complainant

Versus

1.  The Manager, State Bank of India, Life Insurance Company, Circular Road, Faridkot.
2. Sheelam Rani, Associate Faridkot, SBI Life Insurance Company Limited, TeleNo.01639-500802 Mob: 9184374-46801.
3. SBI Life Insurance Company Limited, Central Processing Centre, 8^th Level Seawords, Grand Central Tower,2, Plot No.R-1, Sector 40 Seawords, Nerul Node, Navi Mumbai-400706, through its Director/Head Group Operation (PMJJBY Claims) (Punjab).                             

                                                                       .....OPs

Complaint under Section 12 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Quorum: Sh. Ajit Aggarwal, President,

                Smt. Param Pal Kaur, Member.

 

Present: Sh  Jatinder Marria, Ld Counsel for complainant,

              Sh Mandeep Channana, Ld Counsel for OPs.

ORDER

(Ajit Aggarwal, President)

                                         Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against OPs seeking directions to OPs to make payment of insurance claim on account of Death Claim Form No.30336691877 and for further directing OPs to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for harassment, inconvenience, mental agony besides litigation expenses.

2                                Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that Jagdev Singh /husband of complainant was having saving account with State Bank of India Branch Faridkot and on pursuance of OPs, her husband purchased policy in his name vide Group Policy death claim Form No.30336691877 dt 28.05.2015 and OPs deducted Rs.12/-from his account. Husband of complainant died on 28.05.2015 in an accident while coming back from his job from Faridkot to Kotkapura. FIR regarding this was got recorded on 29.05.2015. It is submitted that complainant being nominee and wife of said Jagdev Singh is entitled for death claim on account of death of her husband. It is pertinent to mention here that OPs did not provide any terms and conditions at the time of filling the proposal form. After the death of her husband, complainant informed the OPs and furnished all the requisite documents to them, but despite repeated requests, OPs have not processed the claim of complainant and on approaching the office of OP-2, she was handed over a reply stating that “documents yet to be received at our end for processing”. Complainant has completed all the formalities and has furnished all the requisite documents to them but till now, OPs have not paid a single penny and are delaying the matter for no reason. Despite repeated requests by complainant, OPs have not made payment of genuine insurance claim and this action of OPs in not passing the claim of complainant amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice on their part. Complainant has prayed for accepting the present complaint alongwith compensation and litigation expenses besides main relief. Hence, the  present complaint.

3                                         The counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 28.08.2017, complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite party.

4                                    On receipt of the notice, OP-3 filed written statement taking preliminary objections that complaint against OP-3 is not maintainable for want of territorial jurisdiction. It is further averred that subject matter of complaint and all the allegations of complainant pertain to Pradhan Mantri Suraksha Bima Yojana (PMSBY) and answering OPs have not given any cover under the said scheme. The same was communicated to complainant vide letter dated 16.12.2016 and thus, complaint is liable to be dismissed due to non joinder of necessary party. However, on merits, OPs have denied all the allegations levelled by complainant being wrong, incorrect and frivolous and asserted that they do not have any policy having premium of Rs.12/- only. Allegations regarding forcing the complainant to opt for this policy and debit of Rs.12/-from the account of deceased Jagdev Singh also denied. It is further averred SBI Life Insurance and State Bank of India are two separate legal entities and answering OP/OP-3 is not responsible for any act of omission or commission done by State Bank of India and thus, OP-3 cannot be held liable for the fault on the part of Bank. As per OP-3, policy in question does not pertain to SBI Life Insurance Company and thus, OP-3 is not liable to pay any claim.  Policy having premium of Rs.12/- pertains to Pradhan Mantri Surksha Bima YOjana and OP-3 is not administering the said scheme and thus, answering OP is not responsible to make paymen of Rs.2 lacs under the scheme to complainant. No cause of action arises against OP and there is no deficiency in service on the part of answering OP. All the other allegations are denied being wrong and incorrect and allegations with regard to relief sought too are refuted with a prayer that complaint deserves to be dismissed with costs.

5                                   Notice issued to OP-1 and 2 was served but despite services of summons alongwith complaint, nobody appeared in the Forum either in person or through counsel to contest the case, therefore, after long waiting, when no body appeared on their part, then, both OP-1 and OP-2 were proceeded against exparte, but at later stage, Sh Mandeep Channana ld counsel for OP-3 also filed his power of attorney on behalf of OP-1 and 2.

6                                       Parties were given proper opportunities to prove their respective case. The complainant tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.C-1, and documents Ex C-2 to C-8 and then, closed his evidence.

7                                             In order to rebut the evidence of the complainant, the ld Counsel for OPs tendered in evidence affidavit of Dhanaya K P as Ex OP-3/1 and then, closed the evidence.

8                                            We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have very carefully gone through the affidavits and documents on the file.

9                                            From the careful perusal of record and after going through evidence and documents produced on file by complainant as well as OPs, it is observed that case of complainant is that the deceased Jagdev Singh /husband of complainant was having saving account with State Bank of India, Faridkot and on pursuance of OPs, he purchased policy in question in his name vide Group Policy death claim Form No.30336691877 dt 28.05.2015 and OPs deducted Rs.12/-from his account. He died on 28.05.2015 in an accident and FIR regarding this was got recorded on 29.05.2015. Complainant being nominee and wife of said Jagdev Singh is entitled for death claim on account of death of her husband. Ld Counsel for complainant submitted that OPs did not provide any terms and conditions at the time of filling the proposal form and after the death of her husband, when complainant informed OPs regarding his death and furnished all the requisite documents, they did not pass the insurance claim. It is further submitted that despite repeated requests, OPs have not processed the claim of complainant. On approaching the office of OP-2, she was handed over a reply stating that “documents yet to be received at our end for processing”. Complainant has completed all the formalities and has furnished all the requisite documents to them but till now, OPs have not paid the death claim and are delaying the matter for no reason. Action of OPs in not passing the claim of complainant amounts to deficiency in service.  Ld counsel for complainant has prayed for accepting the present complaint alongwith compensation and litigation expenses besides main relief.

10                                      To controvert the allegations of complainant, ld counsel for OPs argued before the Forum that complaint against them is not maintainable for want of territorial jurisdiction and even subject matter of complaint and all the allegations of complainant pertain to Pradhan Mantri Suraksha Bima Yojana (PMSBY) and answering OPs have not given any cover under the said scheme. The same was communicated to complainant vide letter dated 16.12.2016. Present complaint is liable to be dismissed due to non joinder of necessary party. OPs have denied all the allegations levelled by complainant being wrong and asserted that they do not have any policy having premium of Rs.12/- only. Allegations regarding forcing the complainant to opt for this policy and debitof Rs.12/-from the account of deceased Jagdev Singh also denied. SBI Life Insurance and State Bank of India are two separate legal entities and OPs are not responsible for any act of omission or commission done by State Bank of India and thus, they cannot be held liable for the fault on the part of Bank. Moreover, policy in question does not pertain to SBI Life Insurance Company and thus, OPs are not liable to pay any claim. Policy having premium of Rs.12/- pertains to Pradhan Mantri Surksha Bima Yojana and OPs are not administering the said scheme and thus, OPs are not responsible to make payment of Rs.2 lacs under the scheme to complainant. No cause of action arises against OPs and there is no deficiency in service on their part. All the other allegations are denied being wrong and prayer for dismissal complaint is made.

11                                       In the light of document Ex C-2/statement of account, it is clear that Rs.12 were debited by State Bank of India from the account of complainant on 28.05.2015 and further this amount was transferred or credited to the account of OPs towards Pradhan Mantri Suraksha BimaYojana scheme. Ex C-4 is the copy of FIR registered on 28.05.2015 which also prove the pleadings of complainant. Death Certificate Ex C-5 leaves no doubt to the grievance of complainant and through Ex C-6 it is crystal clear that husband of complainant Jagdev Singh now deceased was insured with OPs under PMJBY Death Claim Form 30336691877. Plea taken by Ops that they have not received documents pertaining to alleged claim is not appropriate and seems to be totally incorrect. There is no doubt that husband of complainant was having saving bank account with State Bank of India as Ex C-3 copy of pass book issued by Bank, is self explanatory. It is observed that OPs have been deficient in processing the claim of complainant as it is also clear from the Ex C-7 which also explains the grievance of complainant.

12                                    From the above discussion and in the light of documents produced by complainant, this Forum is of considered opinion that despite submission of requisite documents and completion of all formalities, OPs have not process the claim of complainant and thus, they have been deficient in providing services to complainant. Hence, complaint in hand is hereby allowed. OPs are directed to pay the claim amount of Rs.2,00,000/- (two lacs) for the death of Jagdev Singh/husband of complainant under Pradhan Mantri Suraksha Bima Yojana to complainant alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per anum from the date of filing the present complaint till final realization and are further directed to pay Rs.5000/-as consolidated compensation for harassment and mental agony suffered by him and litigation expenses incurred on present complaint. Compliance of this order be made within one month of receipt of the copy of the order, failing which complainant shall be liable to proceed under Section 25 and 27 of the Consumer Protection Act. Copy of the order be supplied to parties free of costs as per law. File be consigned to record room.

Announced in Open Forum

Dated : 2.01.2019         

                                       Member                        President

(Param Pal Kaur)           (Ajit Aggarwal)