Date of Complaint : 02/09/2014

                                  Date of Disposal: 17/12/2015

IN THE KODAGU DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM MADIKERI

 JUDGEMENT BY SRI. V.A. PATIL,PRESIDENT

O R D E R

      The complainant has filed this above said complaint against the OP alleging the deficiency of service, for non release of the insurance amount of Late N.N. Arun Kumar.

     The brief facts of the complaint are as follows;

1. The complainant’s son late N.N. Arun Kumar had taken the Postal Life Insurance Policy bearing RPLI Policy No. RKT-SK-EA 147016 23-06-2007 for the maturity value of Rs.25,000/- by paying the monthly premium of Rs.166/-.The said policy was due to mature on 10/07/2020.

    

        The complainant is the mother and the nominee of Late Arun Kumar.  Said Arun Kumar expired on 26/11/2012.  The complainant being the nominee of her son filed an application dated 15/03/2013 before the respondent , claiming the policy amount.  But the OP has rejected the claim of the complainant under rule 39 of the Post Office Life Insurance Rules stating that the policy holder had concealed the fact that he was suffering from Asthama and Down’s Syndrome, since long time and the complaint is not entitled for the policy amount.

    

2. Hence alleging the deficiency of service of the OP the complainant has approached this Forum praying for the direction to the OP to release the insurance amount with interest from the date of death of her son and the compensation and cost of the complaint.

    

3. After the service of the notice the OP appeared through its council and filed the objections and denied their liability stating that the deceased was suffering from Asthama disease since 13 years, and the same was not revealed by him at the time of taking the policy, and same is the breach of the condition of contract.Hence, the claim of the complainant is rightly rejected as per see 39 of the Post Office Life Insurance Fund Rules.Further it states that the son of the complainant has suppressed the material fact of the ill health, with the malafide intention to make wrongful gains. Further the OP prays to dismiss the complaint.

4. The complainant and the OP have filed their respective affidavits and written arguments along with the documents.Heard the arguments of both the sides and now the points that arise for our consideration are as follows;

    

5. Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of the OP?

    

6. Whether the complainant is entitled for the relief as sought for?

    

    

7. What order?

    

    

8. The findings on the above points are as follows;

           Point No.1 :- Affirmative

           Point No.2 :- Affirmative

           Point No.3 :- As per the final order

    

   R E  A S O N S

9. Points No.01 & 02 :-  It is the case of the complainant, that the son of the complainant had taken the Postal Life Insurance Policy on 23/06/2007, for the sum of Rs.25,000/- by paying the monthly premium of Rs.166/- and the said policy was due to mature on 10/07/2020.  The complainant is the mother and the nominee, of late Arun Kumar who expired on 26/11/2012.  After the death of the policy holder Arun Kumar, the complainant, who is the mother and nominee filed the application before the Postal authorities for claiming the policy amount.  The OP rejected the claim of the complainant under Rule 39 of the Post Office Life Insurance Rules, stating that the policy holder had suppressed the fact of suffering from Asthama.

    

10. On verification of the contents of the complainant and objections it is admitted that the son of the complainant had taken the Postal Life Insurance Policy on 23/06/2007, and on the same day he was examined by the medical officer of the District Hospital and the report clearly states that “the insured was healthy with no history of any respiratory diseases”.The only defence taken by the OP is that the insured had suppressed the material fact of his ill health and he was suffering from Asthama since 13 years.But to support the said defence the OP has not submitted any documents, but simply rejected the claim of the complainant.Under rule 39 of the Post Office Life Insurance Rules.But the complainant in support of her case, submitted that as per see 45 of the Insurance Act, the policies, which have been in force for two years or more, the Insurer is prohibited from repudiating the policy on the ground of in accuracy or false hood of such statement, unless the statement pertained to a material matter or suppressed material facts and that it was fraudulently made by the policy holder, the policy holder being aware of the false-hood of the statement or the materiality of the undisclosed facts.Admittedly the deceased took the policy on 23/06/2007 and expired on 26/11/2012 and regular payment of premiums are made.Accordingly the said policy was in force for the period of more than five years from the date of purchase.Hence, the claim cannot be repudiated on the grounds mentioned in the repudiation letter dated 15/01/2014.Hence, we answer the issue Nos.01 & 02 in affirmative.

     

11. In view of the above the following ;

     

    O R D E R

12. The complaint is allowed.

13. The complainant is entitled to receive the sum of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees twenty five thousand only) along with interest at the rate of 8% p.a. from the date of death of Arun Kumar i.e., from 26/11/2012.

14. The OP is also liable to pay the sum of Rs.3,000/- towards compensation and Rs.2,000/- towards the cost of the complaint and the OP is directed to deposit the said award amount within two months from the date of this order.Failing which the complainant is at liberty to recover the same with interest at the rate of 10% p.a. until full realization.

15. If this order is violated the complainant is at liberty to proceed against the opponent as per law provides.

16. Issue certified copies of this order at free of cost to both the parties.

(Dictated to the Stenographer and got it transcribed and corrected and pronounced in the open Forum on this 17^th   day of December 2015)

      (LATHA.M.S.)            (V.A. PATIL)        (K.D. PARVATHY)       

         MEMBER               PRESIDENT               MEMBER

ANNEXURE