Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/51/2017

Lakshmi bai, w/o Late Chandranaika, - Complainant(s)

Versus

Secretary - Opp.Party(s)

10 Jan 2018

ORDER

COMPLAINT FILED ON:01.06.2017

DISPOSED      ON:10.01.2018

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHITRADURGA.

 

CC.NO: 51/2017

 

DATED:  10^th JANUARY 2018

PRESENT: - SRI. T.N. SREENIVASAIAH  : PRESIDENT                                   B.A., LL.B.,

                   SRI.N. THIPPESWAMY        :MEMBER

                                 B.A., LL.B.,   

 

……COMPLAINANT	Lakshmi Bai W/o Late Chandranaika @ Denyanaika, Age: 56 Years, Coolie, Jambaiayyanahatti Village, Nayakanahatti Hobli, Challakere (Ta), Chitradurga District.      (Rep by Sri. G.K. Mallikarjuna Swamy, Advocate)
V/S
…..OPPOSITE PARTIES	1. The Secretary, Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Challakere.   2. The Chief Manager, Agricultural Marketing Board, Bangalore Division, Office No.16, 2nd Rajbhavan Road, Bangalore-01.   3. The Manager, Life Insurance Corporation, 4th Floor, Jeevan Prakash, J.C.Road, Bangalore-02   (Rep by Sri.C.S.Kireetishetty, Advocate for OP No.1 and 2 and Sri. L. Madhusudhan, Advocate for OP No.3)

ORDER

SRI. T.N. SREENIVASAIAH:   PRESIDENT

The above complaint has been filed by the complainant u/Sec.12 of the C.P Act, 1986 for the relief to direct the OPs to pay the policy amount along with interest @ 24% p.a from the date of policy and such other reliefs.

2.     The brief facts of the case of the above complainant are that, her husband by name Chandranaika @ Denyanaika was working as Hamali under OP No.1 with license No.1645.  He has obtained Janashree Bheema Group Insurance Policy from OP No.3 through OP No.1 and 2 in the year 2007 and was paying the premium amount every year up to 2016 to the OP No.3.  It is further submitted that, on 06.08.2016 the husband of the complainant died leaving behind the complainant as the only legal heir.  After the death of her husband, the complainant has filed an application before the OP No.1 and 2 seeking money for funeral expenses.  By that time, the OP No.1 has sanctioned Rs.10,000/- for funeral expenses to the complainant under Kayaka Nidhi Yojana through cheque bearing No.190266 drawn on State Bank of Mysore, Challakere Branch.  At the time of death of husband of the complainant, his age was 56 years.  On 17.08.2016 the complainant has filed an application before the OP No.1 seeking compensation of Rs.30,000/- under Janashree Bheema Group Insurance Policy Scheme.  But, till today, OP No.1 never sanctioned any amount to the complainant.  On 08.03.2017 the complainant got issued legal notice to the OPs through her counsel requesting them to pay the premium amount.  After issuance of the legal notice, OPs have given reply to the legal notice denying the entire allegations made in the notice.  Now the complainant prays to give Rs.30,000/-, the policy amount, Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony, Rs.10,000/- towards transport and other expenses, Rs.10,000/- towards cost of this proceedings and Rs.5,000/- towards legal notice.  The cause of action for this complaint arose from 2007 to 2015 when the husband of the complainant has purchased the above said policy and on 08.06.2016 the date of death of husband of the complainant, the date of filing an application before the OPs on 17.08.2016, the date of legal notice i.e., on 08.03.2017 and the date of reply given by the OPs i.e., on 22.03.2017 and 24.03.2017 which is within the jurisdiction of this Forum and therefore, prayed for allow the complaint.       

 3.    After service of notice to the OPs, one Sri.C.S. Kiritee Shetty, Advocate appeared on behalf of OP No.1 and 2 and filed version and Sri. L. Madhusudhan, Advocate appeared on behalf of OP No.3 and filed version.

According to the OP No.1 and 2, the complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable either in law or on facts and the same is liable to be dismissed in limine.  The averments made in para 3 is not within the knowledge of the OP No.1 and 2 and the complainant has put to strict proof of the same.  As per the policy conditions, the age of the beneficiary is within 18 to 59 years but, in this case, at the time of death of the husband of the complainant was aged about 56 years.  The documents produced by the complainant shows that, the age of the husband of the complainant shown as 65 years and 60 years.  As per the policy condition, the complainant is not entitled for any benefit and OP No.1 and 2 are not liable to pay any compensation to the complainant and OP No.3 is only a competent person to pay the compensation to the complainant.  It is true that, the husband of the complainant has obtained policy from OP No.3 through OP No.1 and 2 and in turn the OP No.1 and 2 recovered the amount from the husband of the complainant and the sent the same to OP No.3. 

OP No.3 filed version and taken a contention that, the husband of the complainant was died on 06.08.2016 at that time, his age was 65 years as per the Election I.D Card.  As per the condition of the Janashree Bheema Yojana Scheme, the age of the beneficiary should be between 18 to 59 years only.  But in this case, the husband of the complainant was died after expiry of age prescribed under the policy and the averments made in para 2 to 7 are denied as false and the complainant has put to strict proof of the same. 

4.     Complainant has examined as PW-1 by filing affidavit evidence and the documents Ex.A-1 to A-7 got marked.  OP No.1 has examined one Sri. Kaleel, the Secretary of APMC, Challakere as DW-1 and no documents have been produced to prove their case.  Sri. B. Shamanna, Manager of OP No.3 has examined as DW-2 and Ex.B-1 to B-3 documents have been got marked.  

5.     Arguments heard. 

6.     Now the points that arise for our consideration for decision of above complaint are that;

 

(1)  Whether the complainant proves that the OPs have refused to pay the Janashree Bheema Yojana Insurance amount to the complainant and entitled for the reliefs as prayed for in the above complaint?

              (2) What order?

        7.     Our findings on the above points are as follows:-

        Point No.1:- Partly in Affirmative.

        Point No.2:- As per final order.

 

REASONS

8.     It is not in dispute that, the husband of the complainant was working as Hamali under OP No.1.  He has obtained Janashree Bheema Group Insurance Policy from OP No.3 through OP No.1 and 2 in the year 2007 and was died on 06.08.2016. After the death of her husband, the complainant has filed an application before the OP No.1 and 2 under Kayaka Nidhi Yojana seeking money for funeral expenses.  The OP No.1 has sanctioned Rs.10,000/- for funeral expenses to the complainant under Kayaka Nidhi Yojana through cheque bearing No.190266 drawn on State Bank of Mysore, Challakere Branch.  After that, on 17.08.2016 the complainant has filed an application before the OP No.3 requesting to pay Rs.30,000/- under Janashree Bheema Group Insurance Policy Scheme.  But, the OP NO.3 refused the same.  The OP No.1 and 2 have stated that, as per the policy conditions, the age of the beneficiary is within 65 years but, in this case, at the time of death of the husband of the complainant was aged about 56 years.  The contention of OP No.1 and 2 is that, they have collected premium from the husband of the complainant and send the same to OP No.3, therefore, OP No.3 is only the competent person to give money to the complainant.  But, the OP No.3 taken a contention that, the age of husband of the complainant at the time of death 60 years was completed.  But as per the documents produced by the complainant and OPs, the age of the husband of the complainant is within 59 years.  According to the OP No.1 and 2, the OP No.3 is held liable to pay the amount.

 

9.   We have gone through the entire documents filed by the complainant and OP No.1 to 3.  The husband of the complainant was working as Hamali under OP No.1 under license No.1645 and he obtained Janashree Bheema Group Insurance Policy from OP No.3 through OP No.1 and 2 in the year 2007. The husband of the complainant has paid every insurance premium amount to the OP No.3 through OP No.1 and 2 from 2007 to 2015 and died on 06.08.2016.  After the death of her husband, the complainant filed an application before the OP No.1 to give policy amount of Rs.30,000/-.  The OPs have denied to sanction the amount to the complainant.  Finally, the complainant has issued legal notice to the OPs.  According to the OP No.1 and 2, the complainant was aged about 65 years at the time of death.  Further OP No.1 and 2 admits that, they have collected the premium amount from the husband of the complainant and send the same to OP No.3.  OP No.3 is only liable to pay the compensation amount to the complainant.  OP No.3 has taken a contention that, at the time of death of the husband of the complainant, his age was more than 60 years but, the same is not acceptable because, at the time of preparing the ID cards, the age was entered by taking instructions from the parties orally.  Hence, the version of OP No.3 is not believable under law.  Hence, the complainant is entitled for compensation from OP No.3.          Accordingly, this Point No.1 is held as partly affirmative to the complainant.

          10.     Point No.2:- As discussed on the above point and for the reasons stated therein we pass the following:-

ORDER

The complaint filed by the complainant U/s 12 of CP Act 1986 is partly allowed.

It is ordered that, the OP No.3 is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.30,000/- to the complainant towards death benefit of her husband under Janashree Bheema Group Insurance Policy along with interest at the rate of 12% p.a from the date of death of the husband of complainant i.e., 08.06.2016 till realization.

 It is further ordered that the OP No. 3 is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/- costs of the proceedings.

            (This order is made with the consent of Member after the correction of the draft on 10/01/2018 and it is pronounced in the open Court after our signatures)         

 

           

 MEMBER                                                   PRESIDENT

 

-:ANNEXURES:-

Witnesses examined on behalf of Complainant:

PW-1:  Complainant by way of affidavit evidence.

Witnesses examined on behalf of OPs:

DW-1:  Kaleel, the Secretary of APMC, Challakere by way of affidavit evidence.

DW-2:  B. Shamanna, Manager of OP No.3 by way of affidavit evidence.

Documents marked on behalf of Complainant:

01	Ex-A-1:-	License Certificate
02	Ex-A-2:-	Death Certificate of husband of complainant
03	Ex-A-3:-	Election ID cards of complainant and her husband
04	Ex-A-4:-	Legal Notice dated 08.03.2017
05	Ex-A-5:-	Postal Receipts and Postal acknowledgements
06	Ex.A-6:-	Letter dated 22.03.2017 by OP No.3
07	Ex.A-7:-	Letter dated 24.03.2017 by OP No.1

 

Documents marked on behalf of OPs:

01	Ex-B-1:-	Salient Features of AAM ADMI YOJANA
02	Ex-B-2:-	Certified copy of Aadhar of husband of complainant
03	Ex-B-3:-	Certified copy of Voter ID  of husband of complainant

 

 

MEMBER                                                            PRESIDENT

Rhr**