Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/273/2014

B.Perumal - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager, LIC of India - Opp.Party(s)

S.Sathish Rajan

10 Sep 2018

ORDER

                                                                        Date of Filing  : 30.04.2014

                                                                          Date of Order : 10.09.2018

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES 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

 

C.C. No.273/2014

DATED THIS MONDAY THE 10^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2018

                                 

B. Perumal,

No.4/6, Venkateswara Avenue,

Sabari Nagar,

Porur,

Chennai – 600 116.                                                 .. Complainant.                                                      

 

..Versus..

 

1.  The Branch Manager,

LIC of India,

City Branch VIII,

Claim Cell, No.559, Mount Road,

Teynampet,

Chennai – 600 018.

 

2.  The Personnel Manager,

L & T Valves Limited,

Manapakkam,

Chennai – 600 089.

 

3. Mr. V.K. Vedagiri,

LIC Agent Code No.01727728,

No.2/131, Railway Station Road,

Vandalur,

Chennai – 600 048.

 

4. The Manager,

IPP Cell, LIC of India,

Central Office,

Anna Salai,

Chennai – 600 002.                                                ..  Opposite parties.

          

Counsel for complainant                 :  M/s. S. Satish Rajan & others

Counsel for opposite parties 1 & 4 :  Mr. Michael Marie Antony

Counsel for the 2^nd opposite party :  Mrs. D. Veda

Counsel for the 3^rd opposite party :  Exparte

 

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 praying to pay the entire difference in amount of Rs.732/- with interest at the rate of 24% p.a. from April 2012 to till payment, to pay a sum of Rs.60,000/- towards compensation for physical strain and mental agony with cost of Rs.2,000/- to the complainant.

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

The complainant availed the LIC Jeevandhara Pension Scheme vide Policy bearing No.S711574479 when the complainant was working with Audco India Limited which is now called as L & T Valves limited.  The complainant retired from service on 31.10.2011 and is entitled for monthly pension of Rs.549.50.   But the 1^st opposite party paid a sum of Rs.519/- towards monthly pension and thereby, a shortage of Rs.30.50 per month caused for the past two years.  Even after repeated requests and demands, the opposite parties has not come forward to settle the amount.   Hence the complainant sent letter dated:07.01.2014 to the opposite parties.   But the opposite parties has not come forward to settle the demands of the complainant.   Hence the complaint is filed.

2.      The brief averments in the written version filed by the  opposite parties 1 & 4 is as follows:

The opposite parties 1 & 4 specifically deny each and every allegations made in the complaint and puts the complainant to strict proof of the same.   The opposite parties 1 & 4 state that the complainant had taken a Jeevan Dhara Policy vide policy No.711574479 and the monthly pension mentioned in the policy was Rs.549.50/-.  The insurance cover was granted subject to the terms and conditions of the policy.   As per the policy, the complainant was due for pension from 23.03.2012.  While escalating the records, the monthly premium of Rs.60/- was collected under the Salary Savings Scheme (SSS) and left out the single premium.   As a result, the pension was escalated to the extent of Rs.519/- only instead of Rs.549.50.   The opposite parties deny the allegation that the complainant had made repeated requests by various means to settle the shortage of pension paid to the complainant.   It is submitted that even before the receipt of legal notice dated:07.01.2014 issued by the complainant, the opposite parties have escalated the case of the complainant along with requisite particulars for modification of pension amount to the higher authorities for approval.   As such, the opposite parties have not committed any deficiency in service as alleged by the complainant.  Therefore, the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

3.      The brief averments in the written version filed by the  2^nd opposite party is as follows:

The 2^nd opposite party specifically denies each and every allegation made in the complaint and puts the complainant to strict proof of the same.    The complainant had taken the Jeevandhara Scheme from the 1^st opposite party.    This opposite party is not aware of the averment in paragraph No.4 of the complaint that the first opposite party is paying Rs.519/- to the complainant with a shortage of Rs.30.50 per month for the past two years.  This opposite party is in no manner connected with the Scheme or the transaction or pension receivable by the complainant.  The policy is in between the insurer and the insured, namely the 1^st opposite party and the complainant.  There is no agreement or contract between the complainant and this opposite party with reference to the payment of pension under the policy taken by the complainant.  There is no cause of action against this opposite party.  This opposite party is not liable to pay to the complainant any of the amounts claimed in the above complaint. 

4.     Inspite of receipt of notice, the 3^rd opposite party has not chosen to appear before this Forum and the 3^rd opposite party was set Exparte.

5.   To prove the averments in the complaint, the complainant has filed proof affidavit as his evidence and documents Ex.A1 to Ex.A6 are marked.  Proof affidavit of the opposite parties 1 & 4 filed and no documents filed and marked on the side of the opposite parties 1 & 4.  Proof affidavit of the 2^nd opposite party filed and no documents filed and marked on the side of the 2^nd opposite party.

6.      The points for consideration is:-

1. Whether the complainant is entitled the difference amount of Rs.732/- with interest at the rate of 24% p.a.as prayed for?
2. Whether the complainant entitled to a sum of Rs.60,000/- towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.2,000/- as prayed for?

7.      On point:-

The 3^rd opposite party remained Exparte.  Both the complainant, opposite parties 1, 2 & 4 filed their written arguments.  Perused the records namely the complaint, written version, proof affidavits, documents etc.  Admittedly, the complainant availed the LIC Jeevandhara Pension Scheme vide Policy bearing No.S711574479 as per Ex.A1; when the complainant was working with Audco India Limited which is now called as L & T Valves limited.   The complainant retired from service on 31.10.2011 and is entitled for monthly pension of Rs.549.50.   But the 1^st opposite party paid a sum of Rs.519/- towards monthly pension and thereby, a shortage of Rs.30.50 per month caused for the past two years.  Even after repeated requests and demands, the opposite parties has not come forward to settle the amount.  Hence the complainant addressed a letter dated:07.01.2014 vide Ex.A2 to Ex.A5 and filed this case claiming shortage of amount with compensation. 

8.     The contention of the opposite parties 1, 2 & 4 is that the monthly pension mentioned in the policy was Rs.549.50/- as per Ex.A1.  The insurance cover was granted subject to the terms and conditions of the policy.   As per the policy, the complainant was due for pension from 23.03.2012.  While escalating the records, the monthly premium of Rs.60/- was collected under the Salary Savings Scheme (SSS) and left out the single premium.   As a result, the pension was escalated to the extent of Rs.519/- only instead of Rs.549.50.   Now, the opposite party filed a Memo of calculation in detail and ready to settle the amount which reads as follows:

PART I

Monthly pension payable as per Policy No.711574479       - Rs.549.50

Monthly pension paid to the complainant /policy holder     - Rs.519.00

                                                                                ­­­­­­________

Difference in monthly pension                                      - Rs.  30.50

                                                                                ­­­­­_________

Therefore, difference in monthly pension payable from

23.04.2012 to 31.03.2016 (Rs.30.50 x 12 x 4 years)        - Rs.1,464.00

Penal Interest @ 9% p.a.                                               – Rs.   131.76                                                                                    ­­­__________

Proposed Amount for compromise                                 - Rs.1,595.76

                                                                                _________­­­_

 

PART II

Thereafter, to regularize the monthly pension to the policy holder on payment of the difference amount in monthly pension till date along with interest @ 9% as per PART I   for which, the complainant has not raised any objection proves deficiency in service. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case this Forum is of the considered view that the opposite parties shall pay a sum of Rs.1,596/- and regularize the monthly pension as per the policy with a compensation of Rs.10,000/- and pay cost of Rs.2,000/-.

  In the result, this complaint is allowed in part.   The opposite parties 1 to 4 are jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.1,596/- (Rupees One thousand five hundred and ninety six only) and regularize the monthly pension as per the policy and to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) towards compensation for mental agony with cost of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two thousand only) to the complainant.

The aboveamounts shall be payablewithin 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 Steno-typist, taken down, transcribed and computerized by her, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Forum on this the 10^th day of September 2018. 

 

MEMBER –I                                                                      PRESIDENT

COMPLAINANT SIDE DOCUMENTS:

Ex.A1	23.04.2012	Copy of LIC Policy No.S711574760
Ex.A2	07.01.2014	Copy of letter to Branch Manager, LIC of India, City Branch VIII
Ex.A3	07.01.2014	Copy of letter of L & T Valves Limited
Ex.A4		Copy of postal acknowledgements
Ex.A5	07.01.2014	Copy of letter to Manager, LIC of India, IPP Cell
Ex.A6		Copy of Bank Statement details

 

OPPOSITE  PARTIES 1 & 4 SIDE DOCUMENTS:  NIL

2^ND OPPOSITE  PARTY SIDE DOCUMENTS:  NIL

                                                         

MEMBER –I                                                                      PRESIDENT