BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM: KURNOOL

Present: Sri K.V.H.Prasad, B.A., LL.B., President

And

Smt.C.Preethi, Hon’ble Lady Member

Friday  the 9^th  day of February, 2007

C.C. No.131/2006

K.Veerachari, S/o. Veeraiah Achari, Aged 53 years,

R/o. H.No.25/117, Sanjeevanagar, Nandyal, Kurnool District.                                                                  …Complainant

          -Vs-

1. The Branch Manager, Andhra Bank,

     Nandyal, Kurnool District.

2. The Divisional Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India, Division Office,

    2^nd Floor Jeevan Prakash, Secretariat Road, Saifabad, Hyderabad.                                                                  …Opposite parties

          This complaint coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri.C.Ramana Reddy, Advocate, Kurnool for complainant, and Sri. A. Rama Subba Reddy,  Advocate, Kurnool for opposite Party No.1, and Sri. I. Anantha Rama Sastry for opposite party No.2  and stood over for consideration till this day, the Forum made the following:-

ORDER

 (As per Smt C. Preethi, Hon’ble  Lady Member)

1. This consumer complaint of the complainant is filed U/S 12 of C.P. Act., seeking a direction on the opposite parties to pay Rs.1,00,000/- assured amount with 18% interest per annum from the date of death  till realization, Rs.20,000/- towards compensation, cost of the complaint in any other relief or reliefs which the complainant is entitled in the circumstances of the case.
2. The brief facts of the complainant’s case is that the complainant is the father of the deceased A.Ravindra Achari who opened an A.B.J. account bearing number 619 in Andhra Bank at Nandyal. As per the terms and conditions of the account,  the opposite party No.1 agreed to cover the life risk of account holder to an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- under group insurance policy  issued by opposite party No.2.  On 05-11-05 the account holder/son of the complainant died in Vijaya Hospital Kurnool due to Cardio arrest. Thereafter, the complainant intimated the death of the account holder on 20-12-05 to opposite party No.1 by enclosing Xerox copies of death certificate, Doctor certificate and bank passbook and requested to send claim form and thereafter submitted claim form complying all required necessities.  Till today the opposite parties did neither settle the claim nor repudiated,  hence there is deficiency of service on part of opposite party in non settling the claim of the complainant though sufficient time elapsed.  Hence, the complainant was constraint to file this  complaint before this forum for redressal.
3. The complainant in support of his case relied on the following documents viz: (1)Andhra Bank pass book bearing Account No.A.B.J. 619 issued to K.Ravindra Achari (2)death certificate issued by Kurnool Municipal Corporation (3)office copy of letter dated:20-12-05, of complainant to opposite party No.1 (4)letter dated:07-04-06 of opposite party No.1  to complainant (5)Xerox copy of letter dated:19-08-06 of complainant addressed to head office of opposite party No. and (6)office copy of letter dated:06-09-06 of opposite party No.1 to Office of Banking Ombudsman,  besides to the sworn affidavit of the complainant in reiteration of his complaint averments and the above documents are marked as Ex.A1 to A6 for its appreciation in this case. The complainant caused interrogatories to opposite parties No.1 and 2 and suitablely replied to the interrogatories caused by opposite parties No.1 and 2.
4. In pursuance to the notice of this forum as to this case of the complainant,  the opposite parties appeared through their standing counsel and filed separate written version.
5. The written version of opposite party No.1 submits that the deceased K.Ravindra Achari was holder of their account and it acts as a fecilitator between opposite party No.2 and the nominee or insured and it has nothing to do with the settlement of the same by opposite party No.2 and it is opposite party No.2 who has to settle the claim and liability can be fastened. It further submits and that it has persuated for settlement of claim with opposite party No.2 and has written letters dated:24-07-06, and 02-08-06 requesting opposite party No.2 for  settlement  of the claim. As opposite party No.2 did not settle the claim opposite party No.1 advised the complainant to approach the insurance ombudsman for redressal of his grievance against opposite party No.2.  Further opposite party No.2 settled the claim and send the D.D. Dated:30-09-06 for Rs.1,00,000/- to the Head office and in turn the same was send to this opposite party vide letter dated:21-09-06 and the same was received by this office on 25-09-06 and the same was delivered to the complainant on 28-09-06. Hence, there is no deficiency of service on part of this opposite party and seeks for the dismissal of the complaint.
6. The written version of opposite party No.2 submits that the account holder was covered under the group insurance policy for Rs.1,00,000/- under master policy No.1511172 and the deceased K.Ravindra Achari was one of the account holder of opposite party No.1 and he died on 05-12-05 and the death  was intimated was  opposite party No.2 called for requirements Viz medical report and case sheet from Vijaya Hospital Kurnool. After receipt of requirements the opposite party No.2 settled  the claim for Rs.1,00,000/- in favour of the nominee K.Veerachari vide D.D.No.056934 dated:13-09-06 and it was  forwarded to the  head office of opposite party No.1 on 13-09-06 itself and it is confirmed that the complainant has already received the amount of Rs.1,00,000/-  hence there is no deficiency of service on part of opposite party No.2 and seeks for the dismissal of complainant with costs.
7. In substantiation of their case the opposite parties relied on the following documents Viz: (1) letter dated:21-09-06 of Assistant General Manager,  Andhra Bank, Hyderabad, addressed to opposite party No.1 (2)endorsement dated:28-09-06 of complainant as to the receipt of D.D.No.056934 (3) letter dated:01-03-06 of opposite parties No.2 to opposite party No.1 (4)reply letter dated:29-04-06 of opposite party No.1 to opposite party No.2 (5)letter dated:01-06-06 of opposite party No.1 to opposite party No.2 (6)letter dated:12-07-06 of opposite party No.1 to opposite party No.2 (7)letter dated:02-08-06 of opposite party No.1 to opposite party No.2 (8)letter dated:11-08-06 to opposite party No.1 to opposite party No.2  and (9) letter dated:15-09-06 of office of the Banking Ombudsman  to the complainant and opposite party  No.1,  besides to the sworn affidavit of the opposite party No.1 and 2, in reiteration of their written version and the above documents are marked as Ex.B1 to B9 for its  appreciation in this case. The opposite parties No.1 and 2 suitablely the replied to the interrogatories caused by the complainant and the complainant caused interrogatories to opposite parties No.1 and 2.
8. Hence, the point for consideration is to what relief the complainant is entitle alleging deficiency of service on part of opposite parties:?
9. It is a case of the complainant that his son K.Ravindra Achari has opened an A.B.J. A/c.No.619 with opposite party No.1 and the said account holder was covered under Group Janata policy issued by opposite party No.2 to opposite party No.1, under master policy No.511172. The account holder K.Ravindra Achari died on 05-12-05, on the claim preferred by the nominee the opposite party No.2 vide Ex.B3 dt:01-03-06 requested opposite party No.1 to send medical report and case sheet of the deceased from Vijaya Hospital Kurnool. The said requirement was complied by opposite party No.1 vide Ex.B4 dated:29-04-06 by sending the required documents along with covering letter. Thereafter,  there was no response from opposite party No.2 in spite of several reminders letters of opposite party No.1 addressed to opposite party No.2 vide Ex.B5 to B9 dated:01-06-06, 12-07-06, 02-08-06, 11-08-06, and 15-09-06.
10. The complainant being vexed approached  the forum on 22-09-06 by filing this complaint. The complainant pending juries of this case received D.D. bearing No.056938 dated:13-09-06, for Rs.1,00,000/- from opposite party No.1 on 28-09-06 and the complainant filed a memo restricting his claim to interest on the said amount, compensation and costs.
11. The complainant submits that there is delay in settling his claim by the opposite parties, where as on the other side the opposite party No.1 (bank) submits that it is a  fecilitator between the complainant and opposite party No.2 and it has  issued several reminder letters to opposite party No.2 requesting to settle the claim of the complainant but there was no response from opposite party No.2 hence there is no deficiency of service of their part. The opposite party No.2 (L.I.C.) submits that after receipt of medical reports and case sheet from Vijaya Hospital Kurnool, the claim was settled for Rs.1,00,000/- and the D.D.Dated:13-09-06 was forwarded to opposite party’s  head office on the same day itself and the complainant received the said amount and there is no deficiency of service on their part.
12. The Ex.B4 is a letter dated:29-04-06 of opposite party No.1 addressed to opposite party No.2 complying the requirement of opposite party No.2 by enclosing medical reports and case sheet of the deceased. The Ex.B2 is the endorsement of the complainant as to the receipt of Rs.1,00,000/-  by way of D.D.No.056934 dated:13-09-06 on 28-09-06, Hence,  what appears is the there is an inordinate delay from 29-04-06 to 28-09-06 on part of opposite party No.2 in settling  the claim of the complainant, which is certainly amounting to deficiency of service on part of opposite party No.2 and opposite party No.2 is liable to pay interest for this delayed period and the complainant is remaining entitled to interest for  the said  delayed period and costs also.
13. The complainant in support of his case relied on the following decisions: (1) High Court of Rajasthan, between Santhosh Kmar Gupta and another V/s L.I.C. of India, reported in 2001 A.C.J. Pg 1834 (2) National commission between Mau  Aina  Sahkai Katai Mills Limited V/s United India insurance company limited and another, reported in 1993 (3)C.D.R P 179 and 3) National Commission  between United India Company limited V/s imperial gift house and another, reported in 2006, (3) C.P.R. P 256.
14. To conclude, there has been in ordinate delay in settling the claim of the complainant, there is no about that this delay must have caused serious financial problem to the complainant. The opposite party No.2 pleaded that there is no provision of interest on the claim of the insured. The liability of opposite party No.2 to pay interest on the delayed payment under the insurance policy because cause of deficiency of service due to its negligence as per the  discussions made above. Hence, the opposite party No.2 is liable to pay interest to the complainant.
15. In the result, the complaint is allowed directing opposite party No.2 to pay interest at 9% interest per annum on Rs.1,00,000/- to the complainant from 29-04-06 to 28-09-06 along with costs of Rs.500/- with in a month of receipt of this order.

Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced in the Open bench this the  9^th  day of February, 2007.

MEMBER                                                                                          PRESIDENT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witnesses Examined

For the complainant: Nil                                       For the opposite parties :Nil

List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-

Ex.A1 Andhra Bank Pass book A/c.No.ABJ 619.

Ex.A2 Death certificate issued by Kurnool Municipal Corporation.

Ex.A3 Office copy of letter, dated:20-12-2005 of complainant to opposite party

          No.1.

Ex.A4 Letter, dated:07-04-2006 of opposite party no.1 to complainant.

Ex.A5 Xerox copy of letter, dated:19-08-2006 of complainant addressed to Head

          Office of opposite party No.2.

Ex.A6 Office copy of letter, dated:06-09-06 of opposite party No.1.

List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties:-

Ex.B1 letter, dated:21-09-2006 of Asst. General Manager, Andhra Bank,

          Hyderabad addressed to opposite party No.1.

Ex.B2 Endorsement, dated:28-09-2006 of complainant as to receipt of

           D.D.No.056934.

Ex.B3 letter, dated:01-03-2006 of opposite party No.2 to opposite party No.1.

Ex.B4 Reply letter, dated:29-04-2006 of opposite party No.1 to opposite party

          No.2.

Ex.B5 letter, dated:01-06-2006 of opposite party No.1 to opposite party No.2.

Ex.B6 letter, dated:12-07-2006 of opposite party No.1 to opposite party No.2.

Ex.B7 letter, dated:02-08-2006 of opposite party No.1 to opposite party No.2.

Ex.B8 letter, dated:11-08-2006 of opposite party No.1 to opposite party No.2.

Ex.B9 letter, dated:15-09-2006 of office of the Banking ombudsman to

          complainants opposite party No.1.

MEMBER                                                                                          PRESIDENT

Copy to:-

1. Sri. C. Ramana Reddy, Advocate, Kurnool.

2. Sri. A. Rama Subba Reddy, Advocate, Kurnool.

3. Sri. I.  Anantha Rama Sastry, Advocate, Kurnool.

Copy was made ready on:

Copy was dispatched on:

Copy was delivered to parties: