Karnataka

Chitradurga

CC/21/2015

Smt.K.Vinutha W/o. Late G.Harsha - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Deputy Divisional Manager, Office of the Chief Post Master, - Opp.Party(s)

Shri.M.Mohan Kumar

01 Apr 2016

ORDER

   COMPLAINT FILED ON :20/01/2015

               DISPOSED ON:01/04/2016

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHITRADURGA

CC. NO. 21/2015 DATED: 1st APRIL 2016

PRESENT :-     SRI. T.N. SREENIVASAIAH      PRESIDENT                                      B.A., LL.B.,

                        SRI.H.RAMASWAMY,               MEMBER

                                         B.Com., LL.B.,(Spl.)

        SMT.G.E.SOWBHAGYALAKSHMI,       

                                         B.A., LL.B.,                   MEMBER

COMPLAINANTS	Smt. K. Vinutha, W/o Late G. Harsha, Mathod village, Mathod Post, Hosadurga.   (Rep by Smt/Sri. M. Mohan Kumar,  Advocate)
OPPOSITE PARTIES	1. The Deputy Divisional Manager, Office of the Chief Post Master, General Post Life Insurance, No.1, Palace Road, Nangalore.   2. The Superintendent, Superintendent Office, Postal Department, Kote Road, Chitradurga.   3. The Post Master, Head Post Office, Hosadurga.   4. The Post Master, Branch Post Office, Mathod Village, Mathod Post, Hosadurga Taluk.   (Rep by Smt/Sri. District Govt. Pleader)

SMT.G.E. SOWBHAGYALAKSHMI, MEMBER.

ORDER

 

The complainant has been filed this complaint U/s 12 of C.P. Act 1986 against the opposite parties (here in called OPs) to direct the OPs to pay Rs.3,00,000/-, the sum assured under the policies along with current interest at the rate of 24% p.a, and to direct the OPs to pay the compensation towards mental agony and to grant such other reliefs.

 

 2.    Brief facts of the complaint is that, the complainant husband G.Harsha was worked as a teacher.  The OPs are introduced the new policy who Postal Life Insurance for the benefits of Government employees.  The deceased G. Harsha accepted an insurance for his life risk dated 23.12.2010 in this connection.  He accepted Postal Life Insurance policies bearing No.KT-469059-CS sum assured one lakh premium rate Rs. 555/- every month.  Another policy bearing No.KT-49059-CS sum assured Rs.2,00,000/- premium rate is Rs.630 every month and the deceased begin paying premium with the OP No.4.  The OP No.4 send it the same to the OP No.1 to 3.  The OPs have also issued postal life insurance bonds in the said bonds, the complainant was a nominee to the said bonds deceased G. Harsha died on 21.12.2012.  The reason is best known to him only. 

3.     The complainant further stated that she has representation to the OPs to settle the claim and also submitted all necessary documents on 10.04.2013 to the OP No.4.  In response to the said representation OP No.1 send a letter dated 02.08.2013 calling upon the complainant to submit details of medical treatment taken for the period of 2007 to 2010.  It is pertain to measure year deceased G. Harsha was a good health.  He has maintained medical treatment taken for him, because he was good health.  She is unable to submit the details of medical treatment taken by him. 

4.     Complainant further stated that, the OPs are violated conditions of policies instead of settled the claim of the complainant the OPs got issued letter dated 16.09.2013 and 28.11.2013 expressing their opinion for not settled the claim of the complainant. 

5.     The act of the OP No.1 to 4 amounts to "deficiency of service" in spite of received the representation of the complainant. 

6.     The cause of action this complaint arisen when the OPs have refused to settled the claim amounts of postal life insurance policies and stated above which is within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court that is method village, Hosadurga Taluk. 

7.     The complainant is entitled to get Rs.1,00,000/- and Rs.2,00,000/- from the OPs in respect of the said policies alternately the complainant requested the OPs to pay the premium amounts paid by G. Harsha with 12% interest and prayed for allow the complaint.         

8.     On service of notice, the OPs appeared through DGP and filed version stating that, the allegations made in para 2 of the complaint that the deceased Harsha working as a teacher and he has obtained two policies bearing No.KT469059-CS sum assured Rs.1,00,000/- at a premium of Rs.555/- per month and another policy bearing No.KT465097-CS sum assured Rs.2,00,000/- at a premium of Rs.630/- per month, both policies dated 23.12.2010 are true. 

9.     OPs have taken contention that, the allegations made in para No.3 of the complaint that the deceased begin paying premium to the OPs and also the OPs have issued postal life insurance bonds to the complainant and in the said policies the complainant was the nominee are true. 

10.   The OPs have taken contention that, the allegations made in para No.4 of the complaint that the complainant submitted representation to the OP to settle the claim and also submitted all necessary documents on 10.04.2013 to the OP No.4, in response to the said representation the OP No.1 sent a letter dated 02.08.2013 calling upon the complainant to submit details of medical treatment taken for the period from 2007 to 2010 are true.  Further it is false to alleged in same para that the deceased G. Harsha was a good health, he has maintained medical treatment taken for him, because he was good health, she is unable to submit the details of medical treatment taken by him, are all hereby denied as false and the complainant is put to strict proof of the same.  That one late G. Harsha who died on 21.12.2012 due to suicidal hanging resulting cardio respiratory failure and he was also suffering from severe head ache and mental depression.  The deceased was mentally depressed and mental depression.  The deceased was mentally depressed due to above said ailment and committed suicide by hanging himself in his own house at Mathodu village, Hosadurga Taluk. 

 

11.   The OPs have taken contention that, the allegations made in para 5 of the complaint that the OPs are violated the conditions of the policies are all false, in this regard the letters have been issued by the OPs to the complainant dated 16.09.2013 and 02.11.2013 stating that the policies cannot be honoured in view of the grounds mentioned in previous paras and the allegations made in para No.6 of the complaint that the act of the OPs 1 to 4 amounts to "deficiency of service" inspite of received the representation of the complainant are all hereby denied as false.  Complainant is put to strict proof of the same. 

12.   That there is no cause of action for the complainant and one alleged in the complaint are concocted for the purpose of filing the complaint and this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint as the complaint is not attract the Consumers' Act and the allegations made in para 8 of the complaint are all hereby denied as false and need for explanation. 

 

13.   OPs have further contended that the policies obtained by the deceased G. Harsha is postal life insurance Santhossh (Endoment Assurance).  On the back of said policy bond, the policy conditions were mentioned at 12 is as follows:

 

"SUICIDE: In the event of an insured committing suicide at any time from the date of acceptance of the policy, but before the second policy anniversary, then the policy will be treated as void and no claim will be entertained in regard to this policy".       

 

and prayed for dismissal of the complaint. 

 

14. Complainant herself examined as PW-1 by filing affidavit evidence and filed  documents, the same were got marked as Ex A-1 to A-3.   

 

15.   On behalf of OPs one Sri. O. Govindappa S/o Obappa, Superintendent of Post Office, Chitradurga examined as DW-1 by filing affidavit evidence and filed document, the same were got marked as Ex.B-1 to B-14. 

 

16. Heard the arguments.

 

17.   Now the Points that arise for our consideration for the decision of the complaint are that:-

 

Point No.1:-Whether the complainant prove that, her husband had taken insurance policy from the OPs and he died on 21.12.2012 and the claim under the above said two policies made by the complainant has been repudiated by the OPs, and thereby OPs have committed deficiency of service and unfair trade practice and she is entitled for the reliefs as prayed in the complaint?

 

Point No.2:- What order?

 

       

18. Our findings on the above points are as follows.

 

        Point No.1:- Partly Affirmative.

        Point No.2:- As per the final order.

 

::REASONS::

 

19. Point No. 1:-  It is not in dispute that the complainant husband namely G. Harsha was working as a teacher and during his life time, he has obtained two postal life insurance policies on 23.12.2010 from OPs bearing Policy No.KT469059-CS sum assured Rs.1,00,000/- at a premium of Rs.555/- per month and another policy bearing No.KT465097-CS sum assured Rs.2,00,000/- at a premium of Rs.630/- per month.  It is not in dispute that, the complainant husband Harsha began paying premium to the OPs and also the OPs have issued postal life insurance bonds to the complainant husband and in the said policies the complainant was the nominee and the complainant husband i.e., policy holder Harsha died on 21.12.2012 due to suicidal hanging resulting Cardio respiratory failure.  It is not in dispute that the complainant submitted representation to the OPs to settled the claim and also submitted all necessary documents on 10.04.2013 to the OP No.4.  In response to the said representation the OP No.1 sent a letter dated 02.08.2013 calling upon the complainant to submit details of medical treatment taken for the period from 2007 to 2010.  It is only in dispute that the complainant husband diseased Harsha was a good health, she is unable to submit the details of medical treatment taken by him.  It is only in dispute that the policy holder G. Harsha was suffering from severe headache and mental depression and he was mentally depressed due to above said ailment and committed suicide by hanging himself in his own house at Mathod village, Hosadurga Taluk.  It is only in dispute that the OPs got issued letter dated 16.09.2013 and 28.11.2013 expressing their opinion for not settling the claim of the complainant and the act of the OPs amounts to deficiency of service and the complainant entitled for reliefs. 

 

20.  To prove the case of the complainant, complainant herself examined as PW-1 by filing affidavit evidence in which she has reiterated the contents of complaint and filed 11 documents i.e., certified true copy of the documents were got marked as Ex.A-1 to A-3 and other documents are Xerox copies.  Ex.A-1 repudiation letter dated 16.09.2013 issued by the OP No.1 to complainant.  Ex.A-2 copy of the Form claiming payment of a post office insurance policy.  Ex.A-3 certified copy of the P.M. report.  Xerox copy of the death certificate of policy holder, Xerox copy of the postal life insurance Santhosh (Endowment Assurance) Policy No.KT469057-CS sum assured Rs.1,00,000/- date of commencement of risk was on 20.12.2010, Xerox copy of the acceptance letter of PLI proposal date 10.01.2011 date of acceptance of policy was on 23.12.2010, Xerox copy of the premium pass book.  Second policy is Santhosh Endowment Assurance Policy No.KT469059-CS, sum assured Rs.2,00,000/- Terms EA/55 date of commencement of risk was on 23.12.2010 premium amount monthly Rs.630/-, Xerox copy of the acceptance letter of PLI proposed dated 10.01.2011.  Xerox copy of the premium paid pass book, Xerox copy of the 38 premium paid receipts. 

21.  Complainant taken contention that, the complainant husband G. Harsha obtained two postal life insurance policies from OPs and paid premium regularly and in that policies complainant was the nominee.  The above said two policies cover the risk from 23.12.2010.  First policy assured amount, sum of Rs.1,00,000/-, second policy assured sum of Rs.2,00,000/- and the policy holder died on 21.12.2012.  After the death of policy holder who has nominee i.e., complainant has approached the OPs and submitted the claim form along with required documents and requested the OPs to settled the claim.  After receiving the claim form and documents, OPs repudiated the claim of the complainant stating that, claim cannot be honoured, as the policy was not completed two years and premium for Nov/Dec-2012 paid on 24.12.2012 was after death of the insured.  Hence, this complaint and further argued that, as per the terms and conditions of the policy OPs are liable to settle the claim of the complainant.  Complainant is the nominee of the policy holder.  Non settlement of the claim of the complainant, OPs have committed deficiency of service and unfair trade practice and prayed for allow the complaint with cost. 

 

22.  On the other hand OPs have appeared through their advocate and filed version and filed affidavit evidence and list with 14 documents on their side.  On behalf of OPs one Sri. O. Govindappa S/o Obappa, Superintendent of Post Office, Chitradurga Division, Chitradurga examined as DW-1 by filing affidavit evidence in which he has reiterated the contents of version and the documents got marked as Ex.B-1 to B-14. 

 

23.  On perusal of the version, affidavit evidence and written arguments, OPs denied the averments made in para 4,5 and 8 of the complaint as false and the averments made in para 4 in part, denied as false. Para 2 and 3 of the complaint are admitted as true.  The OPs have taken main contention that, the deceased G. Harsha was a good health, she is unable to submit the details of medical treatment take by him are all false and the husband of complaint deceased G. Harsha who died on 21.12.2012 due to suicidal hanging resulting cardio respiratory failure and he was also suffering from severe headache and mental depression.  The deceased was mentally depressed, due to above said ailment and committed suicide by hanging himself in his house at Mathod village, Hosadurga Taluk and further stated that OPs issued repudiation letter to the complainant dated 16.09.2013 and 02.11.2013 stating that, the policies cannot be honoured in view of the grounds mentioned in previous paras and the act of the OPs amounts to deficiency of service inspite of receiving the representation of the complainant all are denied as false and there is no cause of action for the complaint and the allegations in the complaint are concocted for the purpose of filing the complaint and this court has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint as the complaint is not attracted the Consumer's Act and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.  

 

24.  On perusal of the entire case papers and documents, it is clearly shows that, the complainant husband G. Harsha during his life time obtained two policies from OPs on 20.12.2010 and paid monthly premium.  After acceptance of policy OPs issued policy bond to the complainant husband, first policy assured sum of Rs.1,00,000/-, second policy assured sum of Rs.2,00,000/-, the complainant was a nominee to the said bonds.  It is not in dispute that, the detail discuss is not necessary on that point.  Complainant husband G. Harsha died on 21.12.2012 due to hanging.  After the death of her husband complainant has produced the claim form along with necessary documents and requested the OPs to settle the claim.  In response to the request, OP No.1 send a letter dated 02.08.2013 calling upon the complainant to submit details of medical treatment taken for the period of 2007 to 2010.  Complainant is unable to produce the details of medical treatment taken by Sri. G. Harsha i.e., her husband.  It is pertain to measure years deceased G. Harsha was a good health.  OPs have issued repudiation letter dated 16.09.2013 and 02.11.2013 stating that, the policies cannot be honoured.  On perusal of the Ex.A-1 repudiation letter dated 16.09.2013 issued by the OP No.1, stating that, "it is regretted to inform you that the above claim cannot be honoured, as the policy was not completed of 2 years and premium for Nov/Dec-2012 paid on 24.12.2012 was after the death of the insured" but, in the version OPs have not taken the above said contention OPs stated in para-8 of the objection statement on the back of the policy bone, the policy condition No.12 mentioned as follows:

 

"SUICIDE: In the event of an insured committing suicide at any time from the date of acceptance of the policy, but before the second policy anniversary, then the policy will be treated as void and no claim will be entertained in regard to this policy".    

 

Ex.A-2 claim form, it shows on 10.04.2013 OP No.3 received the claim form with bonds and PLI receipt books from complainant.  Ex.A-3 P.M. report of complainant husband i.e., G. Harsha policy holder it is in dispute that, deceased Harsha was committed suicide on 21.12.2012 by hanging himself in his own house. 

25.  On perusal of the OPs side documents Ex.B-1 & B-6 issued by the OPs on 20.12.2010 towards two policies, first policy Ex.B-1 shows the complainant husband Harsha taken policy for assured sum of Rs.1,00,000/- mode of payment cash amount of premium Rs.555/- per month and date of acceptance 23.12.2010.  Type of policy and age at maturity EA 45, second policy Ex.B-6 shows type of policy and age maturity EA55/- sum assured Rs.2,00,000/- premium amount of Rs.630/- per month mode of payment cash date of proposal 20.12.2010 date of acceptance 23.12.2010.  Name of the insured Harsh. G i.e., husband of complainant.  Ex.B-1 and B-6 both two policies proposal for PLI page 2 para 12 nominee Vinutha. K wife age 26.  Para 15 Family history shows has any of your relatives living or dead suffered from any hereditary or infections/diseases? Answer: No.  Para 16 personal history: (a) Are you present in sound health? Answer: Yes. (b) Have you ever suffer from any of the following? Answer: No.  (c) During lost three years, have you ever consulted a medical practitioner for any ailment regarding treatment for a week or more or been admitted to any Hospital or Nursing Home for general checkup, observation, treatment or operation? If yes, please give full details.  Answer: No.  Page 3 of Ex.B-1 and B-6 further shows (d) Have you remained absent from place of work on grounds of health during the last three years?  If yes please give full particulars.  Answer: No.  Page 3 para 19 shows that the Superior of the policy holder S.A. Nadagoudar, Head Master, Govt. High School, Nallahatty certified that, Information furnished under Question No.1 to 8 and 16 (c) (d) have been verified and found to be correct.  It further shows Ex.B-1 and B-6 page 4 para 21, certificate of medical officer (for medical case only).  It shows Dr. Suma S.R, General Hospital, Hosadurga issued medical certificate in favour of G. Harsha who is the husband of complainant and she examined on 20.12.2010 and certified that, G. Harsha is medically fit and she recommended, acceptance of proposal for PLI policy by the Chief Post Master General.  It further shows that at the time of examination and proposal for PLI policy, complainant husband G. Harsha was medically fit and she was recommended acceptance of proposal for PLI Policy.  It clearly shows that at the time of taking a policy, complainant husband G. Harsha medically fit and he was a good health.  Ex.B-2 acceptance letter of first policy sum assured Rs.1,00,000/-.  Ex.B-3 policy bond, Ex.B-4 first policy premium paid book, Ex.B-5 History sheet of first policy.  It shows the date of maturity 23.12.2025, last payment 11-2025.  Ex.B-7 Acceptance letter of second policy sum assured Rs.2,00,000/-, Ex.B-8 second policy bond, Ex.B-9 second policy premium paid book.  Ex.B-10 second policy history sheet, Ex.B-11 statement of complainant given before Marulasiddappa. G, the Inspector of Post, Hosadurga on 20.05.2013.  It shows there is no medical reports, she do not know her husband was taken treatment for medical depression and headache in the previous working place.  Ex.B-12 spot mahazar, Ex.B-13 Final report/charge sheet submitted by the PSI, Shreerampura Police Station, Hosadurga Taluk.  It shows that the case registered in UDR No.0036/2012 date 21.12.2012.  Ex.B-14 death certificate of G. Harsha, i.e., complainant's husband. 

 

26.  On perusal of the Ex.B-4 premium paid book of first policy.  It shows in the month of Nov/Dec, Rs.1,116/- paid on 24.12.2012.  Ex.B-9 with respect to the second policy Nov/Dec amount paid Rs.1,266/- date not disclosed.

 

27.  Advocate for complainant much argued that, the complainant claiming the matured two policy amount for Rs.3,00,000/- including two policies with interest, prayed to direct the OPs to pay sum of Rs.3,00,000/- with interest, alternatively to direct the OPs to pay total premium amount paid by the deceased Harsha i.e., husband of the complainant with interest at the rate of 12% p.a and to award amount of Rs.20,000/- for pain and sufferings and cost of Rs.2,000/- towards the proceedings and further argued that, as per the policy condition No.12, the complainant's claim is not entertained.  It is relevant that, the date of proposal is 20.12.2010, the two years is completed on 20.12.2012.  The deceased Harsha died on 21.12.2012 due to failure of respiratory organ.  Non settlement of the claim of the complainants, OPs have committed deficiency of service and prayed for allow of the complaint with cost. 

      

28.  Advocate for OPs argued that, OP No.1 sent letter dated 02.08.2013 calling upon the complainant to submit the details of medical treatment taken for the period 2007 to 2010 and it is false to say that the husband of the complainant G. Harsha was good health.  She is unable to submit the details of medical treatment taken for the period from 2007 to 2010.  Further argued that, the husband of complainant G. Harsha who died on 21.12.2012 due to suicidal hanging resulting cardio respiratory failure and he was also suffering from severe headache and mental depression.  The deceased was mentally depressed due to above said ailment and committed suicide by hanging himself in his own house at Mathod village, Hosadurga Taluk.  In this regard, OPs repudiated the claim of the complainant dated 16.09.2013 and 02.11.2013 stating that, the policies cannot be honoured in view of the grounds mentioned in the above and the arguments advanced by the OPs advocate.  As per the policy condition No.12 the complainant is not entitled for any sum assured amount as well as interest as claimed by her and the OPs are acted in accordance with the postal department guidelines and the complaint is liable to be dismissed with cost.    

 

29.  On perusal of the affidavit of OP No.2, para 6 of page 2 like "it is observed that, the premium for the month of November and December 2012 were credited on 24.12.2012 at Mathodu Post Office, after the death of G. Harsha and the said amount paid does not constitute a premium for the month of November and December 2012 and does not comes under life risk coverage and the irregular credit of Rs.2,370/- for two months in respect of the above said policies will liable to be refunded".  On perusal of the version, i.e., objection statement filed by the OPs, the above said defence not taken by the OPs.  As per Ex.A-1 OPs repudiated the claim of the complainant.  As per policy condition No.12 is very clear that, the suicide committed at any time from the date of acceptance of the policy.  OP No.4 was received the premium amount on 24.12.2012 in the month of Nov/Dec.  OP No.4 is the Branch Post Office, Mathod village, Hosadurga Taluk.  OP No.4 accepted the premium amount with respect to the above said two policies.  Till today OPs have not refunded the same to the complainant or the LR's of policy holder.  Once OP No.4 accept the premium by the complainant, OPs are liable to pay the assured amount.  Policy holder committed suicide on his own house at Mathod village on 21.12.2012 the OP No.4 accept the premium at Mathod village, the OP No.4 is very well known to the reason of death of the G. Harish and he has the knowledge of the death of the policy holder, the Mathod village is a small village.  The negligence of the OP No.4 i.e., employee of the OP No.1 to 3, all the OPs are liable to pay the compensation under the master and servant liability.  The OPs fail to produce the original premium paid books towards the above said two policies and OPs fail to examined the Post Master who has accept the premium amounts on 24.12.2012 as stated by the OPs in the repudiation letter and till today the OPs have not tried to refund the said premium amount who has paid the same, it shows the OPs have committed deficiency of service.  Complaint filed on 27.01.2015. OPs appeared and filed affidavit evidence on 07.04.2015.  Till today OPs have not return the amount received by them from the policy holder.  The attitude of the OPs shows that, they have committed deficiency of their service and the OP No.4 accepted the premium.  As per the policies, the period of two years completed.  Hence, the OPs are not escaped from their liability.  As per the policy conditions, complainant is entitled for the relief as prayed in the complaint.  Therefore, OPs are liable to pay the compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- to the complainant along with 6% interest from the date of complaint till the payment and also OPs are liable to pay the mental agony sum of Rs.5,000/- and Rs.5,000/- towards the cost of the proceedings.  Therefore, we are no agitation to come to the conclusion that, non settlement of the claim of the complainant, it amounts to deficiency of their service towards the complainant.  OPs have committed deficiency of their service and unfair trade practice.  Accordingly, we answer Point No.1 held as partly affirmative. 

 

 30.  Point No.2:- As discussed on the above point and for the reasons stated therein, we pass the following:

 

 

ORDER

The complaint filed by the complainant U/s 12 of CP Act 1986 is hereby partly allowed.

It is ordered that, the OPs are directed to pay sum of Rs.3,00,000/- i.e., sum assured under the above said two policies along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a to the complainant from the date of complaint i.e., 27.01.2015 till realization.

 It is further ordered that, the OPs are  directed to pay a sum of  Rs.5,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.5,000/- towards costs of this proceedings. 

It is further ordered that, the OPs are hereby directed to pay the assured amount of Rs.3,00,000/- with interest within two months from the date of this order.

Accordingly, complaint is partly allowed.

 

 

 

(This order is made with the consent of President and Member after the correction of the draft on 01/04/2016 and it is pronounced in the open Court after our signatures.)

 

 

 

 

 

MEMBER                                                         MEMBER   

 

 

PRESIDENT

 

 

-:ANNEXURES:-

Complainant by filing affidavit evidence taken as PW-1

Witness examined on behalf of Complainant:

                                                -Nil-

On behalf of OPs, one O. Govindappa S/o Obappa, Superintendent of Post Office, Chitradurga examined as DW-1 by filing affidavit evidence.

Witness examined on behalf of OPs;

-Nil-

Documents marked on behalf of Complainant:

01	Ex-A-1:-	Copy of Repudiation letter dated 16.09.2013 issued by the OP No.1 to complainant.
02	Ex-A-2:-	Copy of the Form claiming payment of a post office insurance policy.
03	Ex-A-3:-	Certified copy of the P.M. report.

 

Documents marked on behalf of OPs:

 

01	Ex-B-1:-	Copy of Proposal Form for first Policy
02	Ex-B-2:-	Copy of acceptance letter of first policy
03	Ex-B-3:-	Copy of first policy bond
04	Ex.B-4:-	First policy premium paid book
05	Ex.B-5:-	History sheet of Second policy
06	Ex.B-6:-	Proposal Form for first Policy
07	Ex.B-7:-	Copy of Acceptance letter of second policy
08	Ex.B-8:-	Copy of second policy bond
09	Ex.B-9:-	Second policy premium paid book
10	Ex.B-10:-	Copy of Second policy history sheet
11	Ex.B-11:-	Copy of Statement of complainant given before Marulasiddappa. G, the Inspector of Post, Hosadurga on 20.05.2013
12	Ex.B-12:-	Copy of spot mahazar
13	Ex.B-13:-	Copy of Final report/charge sheet
14	Ex.B-14:-	Copy of death certificate of G. Harsha, husband of Complainant

 

 

MEMBER                                                         MEMBER      

               

 

 

PRESIDENT

Rhr.