26-08-14 –     Heard Mr. Chandrajit Mukherjee on limitation and on merit at length.  

2.       This appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 14.03.12 passed in Consumer Complaint no. 57/2012, by learned District Consumer Forum, Bokaro, directing the appellant  to pay Rs. 5 lacs to the complainant, alongwith interest @ 9% per annum, from the date of repudiation of her claim, till the date of payment.

3.       The claimant filed the said complaint case against the appellant(Insurance Company for short) and the Bokaro Steel Samuhik Durghana Bima Samiti (Samiti for short), claiming GPA insurance policy amounting to Rs. 5 lacs with interest from the date of repudiation of the claim and also compensation, on the ground of deficiency in service, on the part of the Samiti and the Insurance Company. 

The said claim was on account of death of her husband which occurred on 06.07.2011 due to road accident, about which FIR was lodged and the insurance claim was also filed before the controlling officer of the deceased, within time i.e. on 24.09.11. 

4.       The Insurance Company repudiated the claim on the ground of submission of the claim application beyond the prescribed 90 days.

          The Insurance Company and the Samiti contested the case.

5.       Mr. Mukherjee reiterated the said stand of the Insurance Company and submitted that the learned Lower Forum has not considered the case properly.

6.       We find that after hearing the parties and considering their respective cases, and the materials brought on record by them, in detail, the learned Lower Forum has rightly found that the complainant had filed the claim papers within time but the Samiti was responsible for the negligence and delay in forwarding the claim timely; and that the rejection of claim on the ground of such delay was not acceptable.  Accordingly the Secretary of the Samiti has also been directed to pay Rs. 5,000/- to the complainant from his own pocket.

7.       After hearing Mr. Mukherjee and going through the brief, we find that even if the delay of about six weeks in filing this appeal is ignored, there is no merit in this appeal. 

It is accordingly dismissed.

8.       On this Mr. Mukherjee submitted that this case may not be treated as precedence, as otherwise the Insurance Company will be flooded with such cases.

In our opinion, if the Samiti, the agent of the Insurance Company is not performing its duty properly, it is for the Insurance Company to do whatever it thinks fit and proper. We do not want to make any observation. 

 As prayed, let the statutory amount deposited by the appellant be returned, within four weeks.   

          Issue free copy of this order to all concerned for information and needful.

Ranchi,    

Dated: 26.08.2014