Orissa

Kalahandi

CC/37/2021

Pranati Dash, aged about 35 years - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager L.I.C Of India - Opp.Party(s)

Rajendra Ku Mund & Associate

01 Dec 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KALAHANDI
NEAR TV CENTRE PADA, BHAWANIPATANA, KALAHANDI
ODISHA, PIN 766001
 
Complaint Case No. CC/37/2021
( Date of Filing : 04 Aug 2021 )
 
1. Pranati Dash, aged about 35 years
W/o-Niranjan Dash At-Mandarbagicha Pada,Po/Ps-Bhawanipatna,
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. The Branch Manager L.I.C Of India
At-Old Cimena Hall pada,Po-Bhawanipatna,Dist-Kalahandi,Odisha
2. Rabindranath Sahu, aged about 45 years
S/O-Late Nursingha Sahu, Agent L.I.C At-Chudihari Pada,Po-Bhawanipatna
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. Aswini Kumar Patra PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Sudhakar Senapothi MEMBER
 
PRESENT:Rajendra Ku Mund & Associate, Advocate for the Complainant 1
 : Sri S.K. Panda & Associate, Advocate, Advocate for the Opp. Party 1
Dated : 01 Dec 2022
Final Order / Judgement
  1. Heard. Perused the material on record. We have our thoughtful consideration on the submission of Learned Counsel for the parties.
  2. The facts of the complaint in brief are  that, the complainant has purchased a  Insurance Policy with quarterly premium vide Policies No.573263398 of  Rs.730/-, No.573263397 of Rs.925/-, No.573263396 of Rs.1257/-, No.573263395 of  Rs.1034/-, No.572104082 of Rs.1989/-, No.573781626 of Rs.4358/-, No.573767668 of Rs.7566/-, No.573243184 of Rs.1516/- and due to financial problem,  on March,2021 the complainant surrendered all her policies for premature termination  and requested to refund the deposited amount  as per procedure  allowed under the schemes and further requested in writing  on 15.03.21 to deposit the refund amount in her SBI Account No.30347070594 but the Opposite Party No.1 failed to  refund the deposited amount as per the instruction given in writing in the NEFT-Mandate Form dt.15.03.2021 and on being inquired she came top know that surrender value of afore said insurance policies has been transferred  to an unknown account to which the complainant is in no way connected thereby depriving her legitimate money and putting her in financial loss ,harassment .Hence, finding no other option the complainant present this complaint alleging deficiency if service on the part of Ops and prayed before this Hon’ble Commission to refund the deposited amount of Rs.35,482/-  with monetary compensation  of Rs 2,00,000/-along with litigation cost of Rs 55,000/-
  3. To substantiate her claim the complainant has filed the following documents.(i)Xerox copy of Policy coversbearingNo.573263398/Dt.12.01.2012,573263397/Dt.12.01.2012,573263396/Dt.12.01.2012,573263395/Dt.12.01.2012,572104082/Dt.07.03.2009,573781626/Dt.06.02.2014,573767668/Dt.04.06.2013/573243184.(ii)Xerox copy of Performa of application SBI, Main Branch along with NEFT -Form Bhawanipatna vide Account No.:-30347070594 of the complainant.(iii) Xerox copy of Acknowledgement of money receipt Dt.15.03.2021.(iv) Pleader Notice Dt.29.06.2021 by the complainant. (v) Copy of reply of respondent No.1, Dt.07.07.2021. (vi) Xerox copy of Bank Account Statement of Dt.19/20.03.2021 with an affidavit swearing oath that the documents are true copy of the original for admission as evidence for proper adjudication of this case are taken in to the record as evidence .
  4. Being noticed, the Opposite Party No1 appeared and filed their written version interalia denying the petition allegations on all its material particulars. The Op No. 2 does not want to contest the case. 
  5. Learned  counsel of the Opp.Party No.1 submitted that , after  receiving the surrender applications dt.15.03.2021  the Opposite Party processed the surrender application  and credited the amount to the petitioner’s ICICI Bank A/c No.077701504585 vide  NEFT-Mandated Form dt.23.06.2016 which the complainant had given at the time of purchasing of the said policies with her mobile No.8763274382  for receiving information through  SMS regarding LIC policies .It is further submitted that,  the Opposite Party No.1 is not aware of the petitioner’s SBI Account and never received any instruction in writing to transfer the surrender value of the insurance policies other than to ICICI Bank A/C No.077701504585. The Opposite Party has rendered his service and credited the surrender value to the bank account given by the petitioner. Hence, the OP No.1 is not deficient in service to the petitioner as such this complainant is to be dismissed with cost.
  6. The O.P No1, to substantiate it’s claim, has filed the certified copy of NEFT-Mandate Form dt.22.03.2016 duly signed by the complainant along with 8nos of SV Form dt.17.03.2021 and raised objection to the truthness of the Xerox copy of received of policy payment NEFT-Mandate Form dt.15.02.2021 as the said document does not show any acknowledgement of receipt by the Claim Disbursement Officer or Branch Manage rather it is a copy of front page of Bank Passbook and no original of such  documents is there in the office of O.P No1.
  7. Here in this case surrender value of aforesaid 8nos of policy has been transferred to the complainant vide Bank A/C No.077701504585 on 17.03.2021 at ICICI Bank, Bhawanipatna and credited to the said account on 19.03.2021 as it reveled from the document filed by the O.P as per the list of documents dt.17.08.2022 which is  not disputed  by the complainant.
  8. The complainant has claimed refund of Rs.35,482/- but no iota of evidence is adduced on what terms she is entitle for refund of Rs.35,482/- though entire refundable value of the 8nos of  surrendered value has been already transfer to her account as such prayer for claim of refund of Rs 35,482/ is not acceptable  .
  9. It  is found that, said transfer of surrender value of LIC policies is not as per NEFT Mandate Form dt.15.03.2021,copy of which is available on record support by an affidavit of the complainant that, said document are true copy of original submitted by her  to the O.P No.1 remain un-challenged.
  10. We are accordingly of our  considered view that, O.P No.1 is not acted upon the instruction i.e. NEFT Mandate submitted by the complainant dt.15.03.2021 certainly an unfair & deficient service towards the complainant no doubt caused harassment  & mental agony to the complainant need to be compensated .
  11. Thus, looking to the fact and circumstance of the case this consumer Complain is partly allowed on contest against the OP.NO.1 and dismissed against the Op. No. 2 exparty with the following orders:- the Op. No 1 is directed to pay compensation of  Rs.10,000/-to the complainant  for harassment & mental agony suffered due to their deficient service , which include litigation cost. The Opposite Parties are further directed to compiled the above orders within four weeks from the date of received of this order failing which the Ops are liable to pay 12% interest over the said awarded amount till its realization.

Dictated, and corrected by me.

President

  I   agree.

  Member                                    President                      

Pronounced in open Commission today on this 1st  December,2022 under the seal and signature of this Commission.

The pending application if any is also stands disposed off accordingly. Copy of this judgment be provided to the parties free of cost. The judgment be uploaded forth with on the website of the Commission for the perusal of the parties. Ordered accordingly.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Aswini Kumar Patra]
PRESIDENT
 
 
[HON'BLE MR. Sudhakar Senapothi]
MEMBER
 

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.