IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Wednesday the 30th day of November, 2016
Filed on 25.01.2016
Present
- Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
- Smt. Jasmine.D. (Member)
in
C.C.No.28/2016
between
Complainant:- Opposite Party:-
Sri. K.S. Joseph The Branch Manager
Kalluveettil Veedu L.I.C. of India
Andikadavu P.O. Cherthala Branch
Kandakadavu Cherthala P.O. – 688 534
Kochi – 682 008 (By Adv. S. Devalal)
(By Adv. M.S. Thomas)
O R D E R
SMT. ELIZABETH GEORGE (PRESIDENT)
The case of the complainant is as follows:-
The complainant had taken a policy named Accident Benefit Rider Sum Assured Policy Cum Money Back policy from the opposite party and had paid premium of Rs.3,082/- without any default.Complainant had to get Rs.7,500/- as survival benefit in every 4 years.On 9.11.2011 complainant received Rs.7,500/- from the opposite party through his account in South Indian Bank, Chellanam Branch.After that he had not received Rs. 7,500/- from the opposite party that he had to get on 12.11.2015.Even though he informed it to the opposite party so far he did not received the said amount.Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party, the complaint is filed.
2.The opposite party filed version is as follows:-
The policy is a money back policy and as per the terms of the policy 15% of the sum assured is payable on the 4th year, 8th year and 12th year as survival benefits.Thus the first installment of the survival benefit was due on 12.11.2011 and an amount of Rs.7,500/- was paid by issuing a cheque No.908995 dated 12.11.2011 of South Indian Bank, Cochin branch in the name of the complainant and he had encashed the same through his account.But without knowing the fact that the first installment was sent by the MASH Department of the LIC., the Cherthala branch of the LIC again made a payment of Rs.7,500/- to the complainant and the said amount was credited in the account of South Indian Bank, Cherthala branch.Thus the opposite party made the payment of installment of the survival benefit in effect there was double payment.Immediately noticing the double payment, the opposite party issued a notice against the complainant from the MASH Department on 6.3.2014 asking for the refund of the amount of Rs.7,500/- paid to him by mistake.But the complainant did not yield to the demands nor sent any reply.The next installment of the survival benefit was due on 12.11.2015.Since the complainant did not pay back the excess amount he received in spite of all demands, the LIC had no other option but to adjust the earlier excess payment towards second installment of the Survival benefit which was due on 12.11.2015.There is no defect or deficiency in service in service on the part of the opposite party.
3. Complainant was examined as PW1. The documents produced were marked as Exts.A1 and A2. From the side of the opposite party no oral evidence adduced. The documents produced were marked as Exts.B1 to B4.
4.The points came up for considerations are:-
- Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get relief and cost?
It is an admitted fact that the opposite party issued a policy dated 12.11.2007 from the Cherthala branch of the LIC and the policy is named as Beema Gold Plan No.179. It is also an admitted fact that his annual premium of the policy is Rs.3132/- and the policy is money back
policy and as per the terms of the policy 15% each of the sum assured is payable on 4th year, 8th year and 12th year as survival benefit. According to the complainant he had received an amount of Rs.7,500/- as survival benefit on 9.11.2012 through NEFT transaction from his account in South Indian Bank, Chellanam branch. But he had not received the next survival benefit which due on 12.11.2015. The opposite party filed version stating that they have paid the amount of Rs.7,500/- which was due on 12.11.2011 by the MASH Department of LIC on 30.9.2011 by issuing the cheque No.908995 dated 12.11.2011 of South Indian Bank, Cochin branch and the complainant had encashed the same through his account. The opposite party further stated that without knowing the first installment sent by the MASH Department, the Cherthala branch of LIC again made a payment of Rs.7,500/- to the complainant towards the very same first installment through NEFT and the said amount was credited in the account of the complainant in South Indian Bank, Cherthala branch. Since the complainant did not pay back the excess amount that he received in spite of all demands, the opposite party had adjusted the second installment of the survival benefit which was due on 12.11.2015. When the complainant was cross examined as PW1, he deposed before the Forum that he had not received any amount as per the cheque No.908995 issued by the opposite party. The complainant had produced the copy of his passbook with the South Indian Bank, Chellanam branch through which he received the second payment through NEFT. The earlier payment through cheque is denied. But he had admitted that he has account in the Corporation Bank, Chellanam branch and Axis bank. He also admitted to produce the account passbook of those banks. But thereafter the complainant remained absent and he also did not produce the passbook of other two banks. The opposite party produced a letter issued by the Branch Manager, Corporation Bank, Chellanam dated 27.7.2016 confirming the encashment of cheque No.908995 dated 12.11.2011 for Rs.7,500/- of South Indian Bank Ltd., M.G. Road, Ernakulam by Mr. K.S.Joseph who is the complainant in this case. So from the document produced by the opposite party it is clear that opposite party has paid an amount of Rs.7,500/- through the cheque No.9078995 to the complainant.
So, it has come out in evidence that the allegations made in the complaint are false and the opposite party has successfully proved their contention. Hence we are of opinion that the complaint is filed suppressing the true facts alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. From the document produced by the opposite party, we came to a conclusion that there was no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party and hence the complaint is dismissed.
In the result, complaint is dismissed.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her corrected by me and pronounced in open Forum on this the 30th day of November, 2016. Sd/- Smt.Elizabeth George (President) :
Sd/- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member) :
Sd/- Smt.Jasmine.D. (Member) :
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainant:-
PW1 - K.S. Joseph (Witness)
Ext.A1 - Copy of the policy schedule
Ext.A2 - Copy of the passbook
Evidence of the opposite party:-
Ext.B1 - Letter dated 27.07.2016
Ext.B2 - Letter dated 30.5.2016
Ext.B2(a) - Copy of the cheque for Rs.7500/-
Ext.B2(b) - Copy of the instruction of collecting banks
Ext.B3 - Copy of the letter dated 6.3.2014
Ext.B4 - Copy of the letter dated 9.1.2014
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
To
Complainant/Opposite party/S.F.
Typed by:- pr/-
Compared by:-
