Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

636/2004

A.Ramesh - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Asst.General Manager,Central Bank of India Regional Office & others - Opp.Party(s)

M/S.P.Govindarajan,A.G.Uma Rani

12 Sep 2017

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing :   20.11.2003

                                                                        Date of Order :   12.09.2017

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM, CHENNAI (SOUTH)

     2^nd Floor, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-3

PRESENT: THIRU. M.MONY, B.Sc., L.L.B. M.L.,                     : PRESIDENT            

                  TMT. K.AMALA, M.A. L.L.B.,                                 : MEMBER I

             DR. T.PAUL RAJASEKARAN, M.A ,D.Min.PGDHRDI, AIII,BCS : MEMBER II

C.C.NO.636/2004

TUESDAY THIS  12^TH   DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2017

 

Mr. A.Ramesh,

S/o. Mr. Ananda Rao,

No.15, Lathuram Street,

Mount Road,

Chennai 600 002.                                          .. Complainant

                                        ..Vs..

 

1. The Asst. General Manager,

Central Bank of India,

Regional Office,

Reheja Complex III Floor,

No.834, Annsalai,

Chennai 600 002.

 

2. The Senior Manager,

Central Bank of India,

269, Bharathi Salai,

Triplicane, Chennai -5.

 

3. The Branch Manager,

City Branch XI,

LIC of India,

United India Building 1^st Floor,

Esplanade, Chennai – 108.                       .. Opposite parties.

 

 

Counsel for Complainant               :    M/s. P. Govinda Rajan & others   

Counsel for opposite parties 1 & 2  :    M/s. K. Rajasekaran    

Counsel for opposite party-3         :    Mrs. C.Umashandar & another

ORDER

THIRU. M. MONY, PRESIDENT

This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 seeking direction to pay. a sum of Rs.4,000/- towards money back policy due from the 3^rd opposite party and also to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards mental agonyto the complainant.

 1. The averment of the complaint in brief are as follows:

        The complainant submit that the  he joined a new LIC scheme namely H.S.S. /C.J.J. jointly promoted by 1^st and 2^nd opposite party bank and 3^rd opposite party i.e. Life Insurance Corporation of India in the year 1987.    It is also accepted that as per the scheme every individual who joins the scheme has to pay Rs.115/- for every month for the period of 60 months from March 1987.   Further the complainant state that in turn the 2^nd opposite party shall pay the quarterly premium regularly and the 3^rd opposite party shall pay the survival benefit at the end of every five years likewise the 3^rd opposite party paid  Rs.2,000/- towards first survival benefit.  Thereafter the 3^rd opposite party has not paid any amount. Hence the complainant approached the 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties bank, at that time they informed that the amount has  not been paid properly  to the 3^rd opposite party and the policy lapsed.   After repeated requests and demands the 2^nd opposite party has paid the premium of Rs.15527/- on 30.7.2003  and the policy was revived.   Since the policy was lapsed there is a difference in benefit regarding the money back policy.   But the complainant has not accessed the quantum of difference in benefit.   On the other hand the 3^rd opposite party has paid the entire benefit into the account of the 2^nd opposite party.   The complainant also state that the 2^nd opposite party kept the amount in the Recurring deposit account of the complainant and it should be refunded only after the completion of R.D. period i.e. after 60 months.   When the 2^nd opposite party failed to remit the premium to the LIC.   As such the act of the opposite parties clearly amounts to gross deficiency in service and thereby caused harassment, mental agony  and hardship to the complainant.  Hence the complaint is filed.

2. The brief averments in Written Version of  the opposite parties 1 & 2     are as follows:

        The opposite parties denied each and every allegation except those that are specifically admitted herein.   The opposite parties state that  the complainant is maintaining a savings bank account with the opposite party bank and had entered into a scheme with the 2^nd  and 3^rd opposite parties wherein the policy holder remits an amount of Rs.115/- p.m. for the first five years; as recurring deposit installment of Rs.60/- p.m. and quarterly premium of Rs.168/10; at the end of fifth year, the opposite party-3 disbursed the first survival benefit amount of Rs.2,000/- under money back policy.  The 1^st survival benefit of the said amount of Rs.2000/- kept with the bank and it is reversed as a reserve fund and it cannot be withdrawn till the maturity of the scheme.   The complainant / policy holder could draw the second and third survival benefit amounting to Rs.2000/- each at the end of the tenth and the fifteenth year just similar to the payment of Rs.2000/- at the end of fifth year.    The opposite parties also state that  the 2^nd opposite party had been paying the premium upto ten years regularly.   However due to fall of interest rate, the 2^nd opposite party was not able to pay a few of the premium  after the tenth year in time.    In the mean while the policies of certain policy holder had lapsed subsequently the 2^nd opposite party was able to obtain permission from its higher authorities to continue the same rate of interest.    The opposite parties also state that  there was a lapse and due to subsequent renewal no prejudice whatsoever has been caused to the complainant.     Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties  and therefore this complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3. The brief averments in Written Version of  the opposite party 3     are as follows:

        The 3^rd  opposite party denies each and every allegation except those that are specifically admitted herein.   The opposite party submit that the policy No.710158021 was issued to Sri. A.Ramesh under money back scheme on 17.3.1987 and assigned to Central bank of India, Chennai.   This policy was covered under ”Central’s Jeevan Jyothi Scheme”.    The first SB due Rs.2000/- settled vide consolidated cheque No.717407, dated 19.1.1994, for Rs.1,25,501.70.  From 6/1992 to 6/2003 the policy was in lapsed condition for which the policy was not eligible for SB, the 3^rd opposite party intimated the same to the assignee on 2.12.1999.  At last the policy was revived on 6.8.2003 by paying an amount of Rs.15,527.50.     The opposite party submit that the second and third SB were settled on 21.8.2003 for Rs.2,000/-each.   Once again the policy was lapsed from 9/2003 to 3/2004 and revived on 19.8.2004.  Finally maturity claim of Rs.16,700/- settled on 15.2.2007 dated 17.3.2007 and encashed on 20.3.2007.    The claim is unjust and not maintainable in eyes of law.   Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and therefore this complaint is liable to be dismissed.

4.     In order to prove the averments of the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A11 marked.  Proof affidavit of opposite parties filed and Ex.B1 to Ex.B9  marked on the side of the opposite parties.  

5.   The points for the consideration is:  

1. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.4,000/- towards money back policy due from the 3^rd opposite party.

 

2. Whether the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards mental agony with cost as prayed for?

 

 

6. POINTS 1 & 2:

The learned counsel for the complainant contended that admittedly the complainant joined a new LIC scheme namely H.S.S. /C.J.J. jointly promoted by 1^st and 2^nd opposite party bank and 3^rd opposite party i.e. Life Insurance Corporation of India in the year 1987.It is also accepted that as per the scheme every individual who joins the scheme has to pay Rs.115/- for every month for the period of 60 months from March 1987.In turn the 2^nd opposite party shall pay the quarterly premium regularly and the 3^rd opposite party shall pay the survival benefit at the end of every five years likewise the 3^rd opposite party paidRs.2,000/- towards first survival benefit.Thereafter the 3^rd opposite party has not paid any amount.Hence the complainant approached the 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties bank at that time they informed that the amount hasnot been paid properlyto the 3^rd opposite party and the policy lapsed.After repeated requests and demands the 2^nd opposite party has paid the premium of Rs.15527/- on 30.7.2003 as per Ex.B6 and the policy was revived.The contention of the complainant is that since the policy was lapsed there is a difference in benefit regarding the money back policy.But the complainant has not accessed the quantum of difference in benefit.On the other hand the 3^rd opposite party has paid the entire benefit into the account of the 2^nd opposite party.The 2^nd opposite party kept the amount in the Recurring deposit account of the complainant and it should be refunded only after the completion of R.D. period i.e. after 60 months.

7.  
8.  

        In the result the complaint is allowed in part.The 1^st and 2^nd opposite parties shall pay a sum of Rs.4,000/- (Rupees Four thousand only) towards the 2^nd and 3^rd survivalbenefit of the policy with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of this complaint i.e. 20.11.2003 to till the date of this order i.e. 12.9.2017and also shall pay compensation of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) for mental agony and cost of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) to the complainant. No order as against the 3^rd opposite party.

            The aboveamounts shall be payable within six weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order, failing which, the said amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 9% p.a to till the date of payment.     

  Dictated by the President to the Assistant, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the  12^th   day  of  September 2017.  

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.

Complainants” side documents:

Ex.A1-  5.12.1986 - Copy of Pass Book of the complainant.

Ex.A2- 5.2.1998    - Copy of Ack. of receipt of policy given by 2^nd opp. party.

Ex.A3- 14.7.2003  - Copy of letter to the 1^st opposite party by the complainant.

Ex.A4- 16.7.2003  - Copy of letter to the 2^nd opp. party by the complainant with

                              Ack.  card.

 

Ex.A5- 17.7.2003  - Copy of letter to the complainant by the 2^nd opposite party.

Ex.A6- 21.7.2003  - Copy of letter to the 3^rd opposite party by the complainant

                              with Ack. Card.

 

Ex.A7- 22.7.2003  - Copy of letter to the 1^st opposite party by the complainant

                               with Ack. Card.

 

Ex.A8- 28.7.2003  - Copy of letter to the complainant from the 2^nd opp.  party.

Ex.A9- 29.7.2003  - Copy of letter to the 2^nd opp. party by the complainant

                              with Ack. Card.

 

Ex.A10- 1.8.2003  - Copy of letter to the complainant from the 2^nd opp. party.

Ex.A11- 5.8.2003  - Copy of From No.680.

Opposite parties’ side document: -    

Ex.B1- 17.3.1987  - Copy of LIC Policy document.

Ex.B2- 9.7.2001    - Copy of Statement of account

Ex.B3- 26.8.2006  - Copy of Statement of Account.

ExB4- 17.3.1987   - Copy of Policy No.71058021 issued to the complainant.

Ex.B5- 2.12.1999  - Copy of letter intimating by opposite parties.

Ex.B6- 6.8.2003    - Copy of intimation for revival of the policy.

Ex.B7- 21.8.2003  - Copy of discharge voucher.

Ex.B8- 21.8.2003  - Copy of discharge voucher.

Ex.B9- 15.2.2007  - Copy of discharge voucher.

 

 

MEMBER-I                        MEMBER-II                             PRESIDENT.