14/07/2015 - The reasons for delay in disposal of this appeal can be seen from the order sheet.
- Heard learned counsel for the appellant on the prayer for condoning the delay of about 90 days and also on merits.
- The explanation for the long delay is that due to official procedure the appeal could not be filed in time. It is true that liberal approach is taken in condoning the delay, but it has to be properly and satisfactorily explained. But from perusal of the limitation petition it will appear that such explanation is absolutely vague and general. Thus, no grounds are made out at all for condoning the delay.
- However, we considered the arguments on merits also.
Assailing the impugned order, learned counsel submitted that till the policy was accepted by the appellant, there was no concluded contract between the parties, and therefore the death benefit was not payable to the complainant. He further submitted that the amount of premium was returned to the complainant but he refused to accept it.
- The learned District Forum has directed the Superintendent of Post Office, Giridih to pay Rs. 50,000/- being the death benefit of the policy plus Rs. 20,000/- for mental agony and physical harassment and Rs. 5,000/- towards litigation cost to the complainant within 60 days of the order, failing which the complainant was made entitled to get interest @ 12% on total amount of Rs. 75,000/- from the date of the order.
- The relevant facts is short are as follows.
The complainant purchased Rural Postal Life Insurance policy for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- on 20.11.2010 from Gadi Bharkatta Post Office, in the name of his wife Manju Devi for a period of 20 years and paid Rs. 1253/- as first premium, for which a receipt was also granted. But the policy bond and the pass book were not issued by the Superintendent of Post Office, Giridih even after repeated requests made to him by the complainant directly and through the Branch Post Master of Bharkatta Post Office. Unfortunately, Manju Devi died on 18.06.2012. The complainant prayed for death claim. Nothing was done. Ultimately under the RTI Act, he was informed that the proposal form was misplaced somewhere else. If the proposal form was misplaced, the Superintendent of Post Offices, Giridih, could ask for regularizing the policy, when the complainant and the Branch Post Master, Gadi Bharkatta made repeated requests for sending the policy Papers. But only when information was asked through R.T.I. it was said that-the proposal form was misplaced and therefore the proposal was not accepted; and after the death the death claim could not be accepted.
The Branch Post Master, Bharkatta O.P. No. 2 admitted that the complainant purchased the said policy and paid the premium which were forwarded to the Superintendent of Post Office, Giridih, but inspite of repeated requests the policy and pass book was not issued.
When the complainant prayed for death claim, the amount of premium was returned to him on about 11.10.2012, which the complainant refused to accept.
- The learned District Forum has rightly held that there was deficiency in service on the part of the Superintendent of Post Offices, Giridih Division, Giridih.
- After hearing learned counsel for the appellant and going through the records carefully, we find no merit in this appeal.
Accordingly, it is dismissed on limitation and merit both.
Issue free copy of this order to all concerned for information and needful.
Ranchi,
Dated:- 14.07.2015
