BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, ROHTAK
Complaint Case No. :641
Date of Institution : 26.10.2021
Date of Decision : 03.05.2023
Charu aged-28 year W/o Madan R/o H.No.423/9, Babra Mohalla, Rohtak.
…………...Complainant.
Versus
- Tata AIG General Insurance Company Ltd., A-501, 5th Floor, Building No.4, Infinity Park, Dindoshi Malad(East), Mumbai-400097 through its Director.
- Punjab National Bank, Babra Mohalla, Rohtak through its Branch Manager.
......................Opposite Parties
COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT.
Before: - SH. NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR. VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER
Present: Complainant in person.
Sh. Gulshan Chawla, Advocate for opposite party No.1.
Sh. S.K.Manchanda, Advocate for opposite party No.2.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case, as per the complainant are that Sh. Bunty S/o Mange Ram was the uncle of the complainant. He was unmarried and complainant used to lookafter her. Bunty has nominated the complainant as his nominee in his bank account. He was having account in PNB vide account no.3009001700037796 and he was using ATM bearing no.6070936145135429 and his life was insured for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/-(Rupees Two Lacs) from opposite party no. 1. In addition to it he has also applied to the Bank for deduction of installment from his bank account under Prime Minister Bima Yojna and his account was under auto debit for deduction of installment. It is further submitted that on 03.05.2021, the uncle of the complainant had expired. After the death of the uncle of the complainant, she had applied for the insurance claim to the opposite parties after arranging all the documents. Thereafter the complainant approached the officials of opposite parties and requested them to disburse the claim amount in his favour. She also submitted all the relevant documents as desired by the opposite parties. But after repeated requests the opposite parties did not disburse the amount of claim and they avoided the matter on the pretext or other. The opposite parties have informed the complainant that life of the Bunty was not insured under PMBY whereas Bunty has authorized the Bank to deduct the amount from his account under the Scheme. The complainant has requested the opposite parties many times to pay the claim amount, but the opposite parties did not pay any heed towards the genuine requests of the complainant. As such, the act and conduct of the opposite parties is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence, this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to pay an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- alongwith interest thereon @18% per annum from the date of death of uncle of the complainant for ATM card and Rs.2,00,000/- under PMBY to the date of actual realization and a sum of Rs.80,000/- as compensation and Rs.11,000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant.
2. After registration of complaint, notices were issued to the opposite parties. Opposite party No.1 appeared and filed an application for directing the complainant to provide the proof of submission of the documents else dismissal of complaint. In this application it is submitted that complainant had not given any policy number or claim number, to prove that deceased was insured with answering respondent for any span of time. Answering respondent has searched their record to their best but has not found Bunty s/o Mange Ram being insured. Hence Bunty was not insured with the opposite party. On this ground, opposite party has prayed for dismissal of complaint. Opposite party no.2 in its reply submitted that contents of the complaint that the life of Bunty was insured for Rs.2 lakh and that Bunty has given standing instructions to the Bank to deduct the insurance premium for Pradhan Mantri Bima Yojna is self explanatory and needs strict proof. No record of notice served on opposite party no. 2 is annexed with the complaint. All the particulars are bald without any date, time, the person contacted etc. There is no proof that Rs.12/- were deducted on the instructions of the deceased. Further the complainant has not annexed any documents that how he was harassed by the opposite party no. 2. It is wrong and denied that the opposite party no. 2 was ever contacted or has given any notice on this issue. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied and answering opposite party prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.
3. Ld. Counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW-1/A, documents Ex. C1 to Ex. C7 and closed his evidence vide his separate statement dated 07.02.2023. On the other hand, ld. Counsel for the opposite party No. 2 in his evidence has tendered affidavits Ex. RW1/A document Ex. R1 and closed his evidence vide his separate statement dated 19.01.2023. Further in additional evidence Ld. Counsel for the OP No. 2 tendered document Ex.R2 and the same was closed vide his separate statement on 03.04.2023.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and have gone through the case file minutely and carefully.
5. In the present case it is not disputed that deceased Bunty was having a Rupay debit card of the opposite party no.2 which is placed on record as Ex.C7. The alleged card is issued for the period 9/2018 to 09/2025. As per copy of death certificate Ex.C2, he died on 03.05.2021. After the death of Bunty, complainant being his nominee has filed the claim with the opposite parties, which is placed on record as Ex.C1 and had claimed the amount of Rs.200000/- on account of permanent disablement and Rs.200000/- on account of death. On the other hand, opposite party No.2 has filed an application on dated 11.10.2022 and has submitted that only two types of cards are covered under accidental policy i.e. Rupay Platinum Debit Card and Rupay Select Debit Cards. Opposite party no.2 has also annexed copy of circular with this application. We have minutely perused the copy of this letter dated 02.06.2021, as per which only Rupay platinum Debit card and Rupay Select Debit cards are insured for accidental death/permanent total disability. Hence complainant is not entitled for accidental benefit. Opposite party no.2 has also placed on record terms and condition of PMB ATM Cards placed on record as Ex.R2, as per which Sum assured of Rs.1 lakh is available for Repay debit card issued in PMJDY account opened upto August 28, 2018. We have also perused the copy of account particulars placed on record as Ex.C3, as per which the account of deceased Banti was opened on 07.07.2018 i.e. upto August 2018. Hence the complainant being the nominee is entitled for the claim amount of Rupees one lakh. It is also observed that neither the complainant nor the opposite party No.2 has given any policy number or claim number to prove that deceased was insured with answering respondent. However, the alleged facility of insurance through ATM card is given by the opposite party No.2 i.e. Punjab National Bank to its account holders, hence opposite party no.2 is liable to pay the insured amount to the complainant and opposite party no.1 has no role in it. Hence the application dated 29.03.2022 filed by opposite party No.1 is hereby disposed off being infructuous.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party to pay No.2 to pay the amount of Rs.100000/-(Rupees one lac only) alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 26.10.2021 till its realization and shall also to pay Rs.5,000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision.
7. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
03.05.2023.
……………………………......
Nagender Singh, President
..............................................
Tripti Pannu, Member.
..............................................
Vijender Singh, Member.
