Orissa

Rayagada

CC/100/2017

Sri Simanchal Dakua - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager, ICICI Bank - Opp.Party(s)

Self

01 Nov 2019

ORDER

      

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

POST  /  DIST: Rayagada,  STATE:  ODISHA,12.10  Pin No. 765001.

                                                      ******************

C.C.case  No.       100         / 2017.                                 Date.    01    .11. 2019

P R E S E N T .

Dr. Aswini  Kumar  Mohapatra,                                     President

Sri Gadadhara  Sahu,                                                        Member.

Smt.Padmalaya  Mishra,.                                                Member

 

Sri Simanchal  Dakua,  Resident of Motilal  Nagar, Po:Gunupur, Dist:Rayagada(Odisha).                                                   …..Complainant.

Versus.

1.The Branch Manager,  ICICI Bank, Rayagada Branch,  Rayagada. 

2.The General Manager,  ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Company, At/Po:Berhampur, Dist:Ganjam.

3.The Manager, State Bank of India,Gunupur Branch, Gunupur,Dist:Rayagada.                                                                                                       …Opposite parties.           

Counsel for the parties:                                 

For the complainant: - Sri  P.K.Dash,Advocate,  Rayagada.

.For the O.P. No.1:-Sri Nalini Kanta Dash and Sri Pratap Das, Advocates 

For the  O.P.No.2:-Sri  Gangadhar Pradhani, Advocate,K.Singhpur

For the O.P. No.3:- Set exparte.

 

                                                JUDGEMENT.

The  crux of the case is that  the above named complainant alleging deficiency in service  against  afore mentioned O.Ps    for  non payment deposited premium during the year 2013 in shape of D.D.  a sum of Rs.10,000/-  towards  policy No. 04928174  on maturity  during the year 2017   for which  the complainant  sought for redressal of the grievances raised by the complainant.

Upon  Notice, the O.Ps  1 & 2   put in their appearance and filed  written version through their learned counsels in which  they refuting allegation made against them.  The O.Ps 1 & 2    taking one and another pleas in the written version   sought to dismiss the complaint as it is not maintainable  under the C.P. Act, 1986. The facts which are not specifically admitted may be treated  as denial of the O.Ps. 1 & 2 .   Hence the O.Ps  1 & 2   prays the forum to dismiss the case against  them  to meet the ends of justice.

Upon  Notice, the  O.P. No.3  neither entering in to appear before the forum nor filed their  written version inspite of more than  20 adjournments has been given  to them. Complainant consequently filed his memo and prayer to set exparte of the O.P No.3..  Observing lapses of around 2(Two) years   for which the objectives  of the legislature of the C.P. Act going to be destroyed to the prejudice of the interest of the complainant.  Hence after hearing  from the complainant set the case  exparte against the O.P No.3. The action of the O.P No.3 is against the principles of  natural justice as envisaged  under section  13(2) (b)(ii) of the Act. Hence the O.P. No.3  set  exparte  as the statutory period  for filing of  written version was over to close the case with in the time frame permitted by the C.P. Act.

Heard arguments from the learned counsels for the    O.P 1 & 2    and from the complainant.    Perused the record, documents, written version  filed by the parties. 

This forum  examined the entire material on record  and given  a thoughtful consideration  to the  arguments  advanced  before us by  the  parties touching the points both on the facts  as well as on  law.

                                                    FINDINGS.

Undisputedly  the complainant  had  availed  insurance policy  i.e. ICICI Life time super pension  U40 scheme in the year 2007 bearing policy No. 04928174 from the O.P. No.2 (ICICI Prudential) and has been paying  Rs.10,000/-  per year towards insurance premium with the  first policy payment being made on Dt. 27^th. March, 2007  upto Dt. 27.3.2016. Undisputedly the complainant  had received  Rs.1,35,222.95 from the  O.P. No.2(ICICI Prudential)  through  NEFT  on Dt.13.7.2017  towards  maturity  value of the above  policy.

The main grievance of the complainant  is that the policy premium amount deposited  for the year 2013 a sum of Rs.10,000/-  has not been disbursed by the O.P. No.2(ICICI Prudential) on  maturity during the year 2017 to the complainant   bearing policy No. 04928174. Hence this C.C. case.

The  O.P. No.1 (ICICI  Bank)  in their written version clearly mentioned that  he had  dispatched the demand draft No. 259562  Dt.21^st. March, 2013  to the O.P. No.2 (ICICI Prudential ) through  Dolphin Courier   on Dt. 25.3.2019  as revealed from the outward register of the O.P. No.1(ICICI Bank) (copies of the Outward register    is in the file  which is marked as  Annexure- I  ).

On perusal of the record  this forum  came to conclusion that  actually the complainant had made Demand draft  at S.B.I., Gunupur  on Dt. 21.3.2013  bearing  D.D. No.259562 and the same  was also sent to the  ICICI Bank, Rayagada on Dt. 22.3.2013 (copies of the  D.D. and  letter addressed to the  ICICI Bank, Rayagada  by the complainant  is in the file which is marked as Annexure-2 & 3).

So there is no disbelieve that the O.P. No.2 (ICICI prudential ) had not received the amount of Rs.10,000/- from the complainant.

At  this stage this forum observed   the interest of justice  would met if   the complainant is entitled    to recovery of Rs.10,000/- with interest @ Rs.9% simple interest per annum from 26.3.2013 till realisation from the O.P.  No.2 (ICICI prudential).

 

In view of the above discussion relating to the above case and  In Res-IPSA-Loquiture  as well as  in the light of the settled legal position  discussed  as above referring citations the plea of the  O.Ps to avoid the claim  which is Aliane Juris.  Hence  we allow the above complaint petition  in part.

 

Hence  to  meet the  ends of justice, the following order is passed. 

                                                                                                O R D E R

                In  resultant the complaint petition  is allowed  on contest against the O.P No.2(ICICI Prudential ) and dismissed agaisnt the O.P. No.1 & 3.

The O.P  No.2 (ICICI Prudential )  is  directed to pay   Rs.10,000/- with interest @ Rs.9% simple interest per annum from 26.3.2013 till realisation to the complainant.. Parties are left  to bear their own cost.

 

The entire directions shall be carried out with in 45 days from the  date of receipt   of   this order.

                Dictated and  correctedby me.

                Pronounced in the open forum on       1^st.  day    of  November , 2019.

 

MEMBER                                                                                 MEMBER                                                 PRESIDENT