Sri Kamal De, President

This is a case over non-settlement of insurance claim by the OPs.

In a nutshell, case of the Complainant, is that his father took a Janata Personal Accident Insurance policy from the OP No. 1 through the OP No. 3 on 29-03-2010 for a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-.  It is stated that his father fell victim of a road accident on 17-03-2014 and died on the very same day at Tamluk Hospital for which Panskura P.S. Case no. 310/2014 has been started u/s 279/304(A), IPC.  On 19-03-2014, the matter was informed to the OP No. 1 in writing.  However, till date the claim has not been settled by the OP Insurer.  Hence, this case.

OP Nos. 1&2 contested the case by filing WV wherein it is stated that only one transaction was made within the Medinipur Divisional Office at Paschim Medinipur and one amount for a sum of Rs. 5,776/- has been credited by Medinipur Divisional Office under their collection account P.N.B. Medinipur on 29-03-2010.  OPs have not issued any policy in favour of Dhuliara Gopalnagar Samabay Krishi Unnayan Society, Dhuliara, Purba Medinipur.  OPs have come to know from the correspondence that proposal was made for the impugned JPA policy in the name of Balai Chandra Maji, now deceased, and monetary transaction for the same took place as per report received from the Manager, Dhuliara Gopalnagar Samabay Krishi Unnayan Society, Dhuliara, Purba Medinipur.  It is claimed that no proposal for JPA coverage has been made.  So, the OP Insurer cannot be held liable to settle the claim of the Complainant.

On the other hand, it is stated by the OP No. 3 that the said SKUS deposited the premium amount of Rs. 240/- to the Tamluk Ghatal Central Co. Op. Bank, Kolaghat branch on 29-03-2010 and the said branch transferred the said amount to the Head Office of Tamluk Ghatal Co. Op. Bank, Tamluk on 29-03-2010.  The said bank, in turn, transferred the said premium to the National Insurance Co., Chandrakona Road branch on 29-03-2010.  It has, however, denied any negligence on its part.

The short point to be considered in this case is whether the Complainant is entitled to the relief as sought for by him.

Decision with reasons

The only argument advanced from the side of the OP Nos. 1&2 is that one transaction was made within the Medinipur Divisional Office at Paschim Medinipur and an amount of Rs. 5,776/- has been credited by Medinipur Divisional Office under their collection account P.N.B. Medinipur on 29-03-2010.  The case is, as such, not maintainable in this forum.  The other argument, as advanced on behalf of the OP Nos. 1&2, is that no policy was issued in favour of the deceased or Dhuliara Gopalnagar Samabay Krishi Unnayan Society, Dhuliara, Purba Medinipur.  It is also stated that the proposal was made for the impugned JPA policy in the name of Balai Chandra Maji, now deceased, and no proposal for JPA coverage or policy has been made and no policy has been issued in favour of the Complainant and as such, the Insurance Company cannot be held liable, and is not entitled to meet the claim.

We find that the deceased, along with others, paid an amount of Rs. 1,920/- under the collection Tamluk Ghatal Central Co. Op. Bank, Purba Medinipur on schedule book of JPA/KCC premium.  Accordingly, we think that part cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of this District and the Branch Manager, Tamluk Ghatal Central Co. Op. Bank is also made a party being OP No. 3 in this case.  It also appears from the documents filed from the side of the Complainant that Balai Chandra Maji, now deceased, along with others deposited an amount of Rs. 1,920/- towards JPA insurance.  Seen the documents – receipt and letters from the side of the OP No. 3 to the Branch Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd.  The fact remains, if no policy is issued on behalf of the OP Nos. 1&2, the fault lies with them and not with the incumbent concerned.  There is no explanation coming forth before this Court why policy was not issued by the OP Nos. 1&2.  Seen the payment receipt issued by Dhuliara Gopalnagar Samabay Krishi Unnayan Society, Dhuliaara, Purba Medinipur.  Non-issuance of policy in favour of Dhuliara Gopalnagar Samabay Krishi Unnayan Society, Dhuliara, Purba Medinipur is purely a matter of responsibility on behalf of the OP Nos. 1&2.  It is very clear that the proposal was made for impugned JPA policy in the name of Balai Chandra Maji, now deceased, and the monetary transaction for the same was also received from the Manager, Dhuliara Gopalnagar Samabay Krishi Unnayan Society.  There is nothing on record that OP Nos. 1&2 did not accept the premium.  If they have not processed the matter of issuance of policy, the responsibility lies with them. We think that OP Nos. 1&2 cannot repudiate the claim of the Complainant or shrug off their responsibilities.

OP No.3, on the contrary, has admitted that the complainant was employed in Dhuliara Gopalnagar Samabay Krishi Unnayan Society as a peon and he took a short term Crop loan and made a Janata Personal Accident Insurance Policy from the National Insurance Co. Ltd. through Dehati Dhuliara Gopalnagar Samabay Krishi Unnayan Society and OP No. 3 for S.T. Crop loan on 29.03.2010 for sum assured of Rs.100000/-, premium Rs.240/-, Schedule Book for JPA. SL-1. The said SKUS deposited the said premium amount Rs.240/- to the Tamluk Ghatal Co-operative Bank. Manager of Kolaghat Branch transferred the said amount of premium to Head Office of Tamluk Ghatal Co-operative Bank, Tamluk on 29.03.2010 vide letter under Memo no. A/3514 dtd. 29.03.2010 S.L. no.4. The Tamluk Ghatal Co-operative Bank (Head Office) Tamluk transferred the said premium to National Insurance Co., Chandrakona Branch on 29.03.2010 by fax. Such fact is not contradicted from the side of the OP nos. 1 and 2.

On the basis of materials on record, we think that the Complainant is entitled to get the insurance claim.

The consumer case, accordingly, succeeds.

Hence,

ORDERED

that C. C. No. 17/2016 be and the same is allowed on contest against the OP Nos. 1&2 and dismissed against the OP No. 3.  OP Nos. 1&2 are directed to pay, within 40 days from the date of this order, Rs. 1,00,000/- in favour of the Complainant as insurance benefit together with compensation and litigation cost to the tune of Rs. 5,000/- and Rs. 5,000/-, respectively, i.d., Complainant would be at liberty to execute this order in accordance with law in which case, OP Nos. 1&2 shall be liable to pay interest @ 8% p.a. over Rs. 1,00,000/- from this date till compliance of this order in toto.