This is a complaint u/s 12 of C.P. Act 1986 filed on behalf of the complainant Sadananda Kundu wherein it is contended inter-alia to the effect that the complainant was an insurance policy holder under Group Janata Personnel Accident Insurance Policy having policy no.100300/47/01/9600022/02/96/30424 issued by O.P.No. 1, wherein the name of complainant’s wife Sandhya Kundu is written as nominee. The period of said policy was from 15.03.2003 to 14.13.2018. It is further contended that on 10.07.2010 at about 7:30 pm while the complainant returning home by plying his bicycle he met an accident with loaded truck being No. WB-23B/8717 and due to said accident his right leg was amputed below the knee. The complainant lodged a complaint before the Kotwali P.S. where Kotwali P.S. case no. 569/10 u/s 279/338 I.P.C. has been started against the driver of the offending truck. Necessary investigation of that accident was made by the relevant agent of O.P.No.1. The O.P. No.2 collection all relevant document by which the agent of O.P.No.1 investigated and filed report. On the basis of letter dt. 06.07.12 the complainant sent all the necessary documents on 10.08.2012 to O.P.No.1 claiming his reliefs. But unfortunately inspite of several demands of the complainant when the O.P.No.1 didn’t fulfill the demand of complainant by paying compensation amount on the basis of the said Insurance Policy, the complainant is compelled to lodge this complaint.
The O.P. Insurance Company contested this case by filing written version and denied all material allegations as alleged by the complainant against the O.Ps. It is specific case of the O.P.No.1 to the effect that as per S.L.No. H in page 12 of the MOU as the case has not been filed within the territorial jurisdiction of Court at Kolkata, this Forum has no jurisdiction to give reliefs to the complainant as sought for. As the criminal case for the said accident before the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, the present case should be disposed of by the Tribunal. In these circumstances the O.P.No.1 prays for dismissal of this case.
The O.P.No.2 contested this case by filing written version and denied all material allegation as alleged by the complainant. It is further contended that the complainant must be suffering both physically and mentally due to said amputation caused by the said motor accident. But as this O.P.No.2 is not necessary party to this case, according to O.P.No.2 the name of O.P.No.2 should be expanded or deleted from the claim petition. In these circumstances the O.P.No.2 has prayed for dismissal of the case with cost.
Under the above avertments both parties went on hearing with following points:-
POINTS TO BE DECIDED
1)Is the complainant entitled to get relief as sought for?
2)To what other relief or reliefs is the complainant entitled?
DECISIONS WITH REASONS
Point Nos 1 and 2:-
Both these points are taken up together for consideration for the sake of convenience
as they are interlinked and interrelated.
Admittedly, the complainant is a policy holder under O.P.No.1. Admittedly the ace took place within the limitation period of the policy in question to rebut the contents of the complainant in relation to claim in question, unfortunately the O.P. could not adduce any satisfactory evidence/materials. On the other hand improving the case the complainant has adduced sufficient materials which remain unrebutted. Considering these circumstances we are inclined to hold that the complainant has established his case for which he is entitled to get reliefs in this case.
Resultantly, the case succeeds.
Hence it is
O R D E R E D
That the Case No. 35/13 filed by S.Kundu be and the same is decreed on contest against the O.P.No.1 with cost of Rs.2000/-(Rupees Two Thousand)only and dismissed on contest against theO.P.No.2 without cost.
The O.P.No.1 is hereby directed to pay a sum of Rs 40,000(Rupees Forty Thousand)only to the complainant as sum assured.
The O.P.No.1 is further directed to pay a sum of Rs 8,000(Rupees Eight Thousand)only to the complainant as compensation for his mental and physical pain.
The O.P.No.1 is further directed to pay off all the decretal amount in favour of the complainant within one month from this date, failing which the complainant is to recover the said amount alongwith interest @10% p.a. on the decretal amount to be calculated on and from the date of filing of this case till the date of realization of the entire amount by filing a separate proceeding against the O.P.No.1 as per provision of law.
