Orissa

Cuttak

CC/50/2016

Bimal Chandra Rath - Complainant(s)

Versus

Sr Branch Manager,LIC of India - Opp.Party(s)

S K Behera

30 Nov 2018

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,CUTTACK.

                                                                                    C.C No.50/2016

Bimala Chandra Rath,

At:Madhupatna,PO/PS:Madhupatna,

Dist:Cuttack.                                                                                        … Complainant .

 

Vrs.

 

1.         Life Insurance Corporation of India,

Represented thorough it’s Senior Branch Manager,

District Branch Office, Link Road,

Cuttack.

 

2.        Life Insurance Corporation of India,

Represented through its Senior Divisional Manager,

Cuttack Divisioin Office,Jeevan Prakash,

Nuapatna,Cutack-1.

 

3.         State Bank of India,

Represented through its Branch Manager SME Branch,

Khapuria,Cuttack.                                                                                     … Opp. Parties.

 

 

Present:               Sri Dhruba Charan Barik,LL.B. President.

Smt. Sarmistha Nath, Member (W).

 

Date of filing:     16.04.2016

 Date of Order:  30.11.2018

 

For the complainant           :       Mr. S.K.Behera,Adv. & Associates.

For the  O.Ps1 & 2               :       Mr. S.Swain,Advocate & Associates. 

For O.P No.3                        :        Mr. Balakrishan,Advocate .

 

Sri Dhruba Charan Barik,President.

                The complainant has filed this complaint against the O.Ps alleging therein deficiency in service on their part and seeking appropriate relief against them in terms of his prayer in the complaint petition.

1. Facts of the consumer complaint stated in brief are that the complainant had taken a Life Insurance Policy bearing No.583021186 from the District branch office of the O.Ps for the period of 15 years commencing from 20.3.1998. The premium was payable only amounting to Rs.5,564/-.  The sum assured under the policy was Rs.50,000/-.  According to the condition of the policy, the O.Ps had to pay survival benefits in each three years amounting to Rs.15,000/- each twice and then Rs.20,000/- for the next 3 years.  Besides it, the complainant being the policy holder is also entitled to maturity claim of Rs.32,250/-.  The photo copy of the policy particulars has been given and marked as Annexure-1.

It is stated that the O.Ps were regularly paying the survival benefits to the complainant from time to time.  But the survival benefit amounting to Rs.20,000/- which was due on 26.3.2010 was not paid to him, but to O.P.3.

The complainant thereafter enquired from the O.Ps about it and came to know that the survival benefit of Rs.20,000/-as claimed by the complainant has already been given to O.P.3 wrongly but the said amount having not been encashed by the O.P.3 has been kept in stale.It is important to leave a mention here that the said policy was assigned to O.P.3 by the complainant who availed a loan from O.P.3.Since the complainant has already repaid the loan amount in the mean time, the said policy has been reassigned to him.Thereafter the O.Ps 1 & 2 issued another cheque vide No.395815 dt.13.8.15 containing the survival benefit of Rs.20,000/- to the complainant.The latter then demanded payment of interest on the above amount since there was a delay about 5 years in payment of such survival benefit without any fault of his own.It is tantamount to deficiency in service on the part of O.Ps 1 & 2 but the above two O.Ps remained silent on the matter.

The complainant had also written a letter through E/Mail to the O.Ps demanding interest for 5 years as stated above but the O.Ps 1 & 2 did not give any satisfactory reply.Annexure-2 series are photo copies of the correspondences made between the complainant and O.Ps.

It is specifically stated that the O.Ps 1 & 2 without verifying the status of the policy should not have issued the cheque to the O.P.3 and thereby they violated the terms and conditions of the policy for not paying the survival benefit to the policy holder in time.As such it is tantamount to gross negligence on the part of O.Ps and they are liable to pay interest for the delayed payment of such survival benefit.

It is therefore prayed that the O.ps may be directed to pay interest @ 12% per annum on Rs.20,000/- from 26.3.10 to 13.8.15 which comes to Rs.13,000/- together with compensation of Rs.25,000/- for the mental agony and harassment caused to him and litigation cost of Rs.5000/-, all total comes to Rs.43,000/- in the interest of justice.

2. O.Ps 1 & 2 have filed their joint written version and contested the case.  At the outset it is stated that the case is barred by law of limitation and there is no cause of action to file the case.

It is also stated that the consumer complaint is bad for mis-joinder of parties and the complainant has not approached the Forum in clean hands.As such the consumer complaint is liable to be dismissed with cost.

It is specifically stated that the complainant wanted to absolutely assign the policy in favour of O.P.3 while availing loan from it and on the basis of due authorization, the policy was assigned to O.P.3.As per policy conditions and the provision U/S-38 of the Insurance Act,1938, all the rights and profits under the policy is thus payable to the assignee bank.Accordingly the cheque bearing No.65326 dt.26.3.10 for Rs.20,000/- was issued to the O.P.3 as the policy was then under assignment status and by then it has not been reassigned to the complainant by O.P.3.The averment made by the complainant that by then the policy was already reassigned in his favour is not correct.It is further stated that no reassignment request from O.P.3 has been received by them till the date of maturity of the policy and as such reassignment has not been executed as yet.In view of the above, it is prayed that the consumer complaint being devoid of merit may be dismissed in the interest of justice.

3. The O.P.3 has also filed written version denying all the incrementing circumstances against it so as to render it liable for compensation and other cost as prayed by the complainant.  According to O.P.3 the policy of the complainant was pledged with it and subsequently it was released/reassigned in favour of the complainant and after its reassignment, the complainant came to know that the survival benefit of Rs.20,000/- was not given to him by the O.Ps 1 & 2.  Subsequently a fresh cheque was issued by O.Ps 1 & 2 for the said benefit which was deposited with O.P.3 and the amount was credited to the account of complainant promptly.

It is categorically stated by O.P.3 that the averment made by O.Ps 1 & 2 that the cheque containing survival benefit of the complainant amounting to Rs.20,000/- has been received by O.P.3 is wrong and that no such cheque has ever been received by it.Accordingly it is prayed that O.P.3 is no way liable to satisfy the claim of the complainant in any manner.

4. We have heard the learned counsels for the complainant and the O.Ps.  We have also gone through the case record and documents annexed thereto.
5. According to the complainant, he has already repaid the loan advanced by O.P.3 about six months prior to filing of this case and the said policy was reassigned to him by O.P.3.  On this point O.P.3 has reiterated the same fact.  But none of them has stated anything as to when reassignment of the policy was made in favour of the complainant by O.P.3 or the specific date of such reassignment so as to determine the liability of any of the parties to this case.  The evidence adduced by O.Ps 1 & 2 does not throw much light on this point.
6. The complainant has taken the specific stand that the survival benefit amounting to Rs.20,000/- accrued as on 26.3.10 has not been paid to him but to O.P.3.   In his  averment  O.P.3 vide para-6 of his version has clearly denied that cheque containing survival benefit for 3/2010 has been received from the O.Ps 1 & 2.   It is also revealed from  the letter sent by O.P.3 to the complainant through E.Mail vide Annexure-2 series.  As against it, the O.Ps 1 & 2 in their averment of written version have categorically stated that the aforesaid cheque for 3/2010 amounting to Rs.20,000/- has been issued to O.P.3 since the policy was assigned to him.  Mere averment in the written version of O.Ps 1 & 2 that the said cheque has been received by O.P.3 and instead of being encashed, was kept in stale account is just not acceptable in absence of any documentary proof in support of their contention; especially when O.P.3 has categorically denied receipt of that cheque in his bank.
7. From the discussions made above, it is held that O.Ps 1 & 2 have failed to satisfactorily prove that the cheque bearing No.56326 dt.27.3.10 containing survival benefit of Rs.20,000/- has been received by O.P.3 and instead of being encashed, it was kept in stale account for about 5 years.  The O.P.3 has also failed to prove when reassignment of the policy was made in favour of the complainant or the date of such reassignment.  The O.Ps 1,2 & 3 are found to have rendered deficient service to the complainant to the extent indicated above.  Hence ordered;

ORDER

The consumer complaint be and is allowed on contest against O.Ps 1,2 & 3.  They are directed to pay interest @ 8% per annum on survival benefit of Rs.20,000/- from 26.3.10 to 13.8.2015 together with litigation cost of Rs.5000/- to the complainant.  50% of the total claim as stated above is to be borne by O.Ps 1 & 2 .  This order shall be given effect to within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Typed to dictation, corrected and pronounced by the Hon’ble President in the Open Court on this the 30^th     day of November,2018  under the seal and signature of this Forum.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       (Sri D.C.Barik)

                                                                                                                                                                     President.

                                                                                                                                             ( Smt. Sarmistha Nath )

                                                                                                                                                      Member (W)