Jharkhand

Bokaro

CC/75/2019

Ruby Devi - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Executive Director Reliance Life Insurance Co. ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Pushpanjali Kumari

12 Jul 2022

ORDER

District Consumer Commission, Bokaro.

Case No. 75/2019

  Date of Filing-06-04-2019

 Date of Order-12-07-2022

Ruby Devi @ Punam Devi W/o Late Pvaveen Jayant

R/o T.F. 85, F Type Coloney, Tenughat, Near Durga Mandap, District- Bokaro.

                                      Vr.

1. The Exective Directro & Presidnt, Reliance Life Insurance Co. Ltd., Registered Office- H-Block, 1^st Floor, Dhirubhai Ambani Knowledge City, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra Pin 400710

 2. The Branch Manager, Reliance Life Insurance Co. Ltd. Branch Office- BOJ Phuro, Krishan Murari Smriti Bhawan, Near Bata Gali, 1^st Floor, Main Road, Phusro Bazar, District- Bokaro, Jharkhand-829144

 

Present:-

          Shri Jai Prakash Narayan Pandey, President

           Shri Bhawani Prasad Lal Das, Member

          Smt. Baby Kumari, Member

                                                -Order-

1.       Complainant has filed this case with prayer to direct the O.Ps. to pay Rs. 3,00,000/- with 18% interest per annum since 30.06.2017 as insured amount on account of death of the husband of the complainant and also to pay Rs 10,000/- and Rs. 15,000/- as compensation and litigation cost respectively.

2              Complainant’s case in short is that her husband has obtained Health Insurance as Reliance’s Guarantee Money Back Policy Scheme vide Policy No. 51783857 from Reliance Life Insurance Co. Ltd. on payment of Rs. 22,872.57 annual premium which was renewed thrice. Further case is that complainant is nominee of that very policy. Further case is that unfortunately the husband of the complainant died on 30.06.2017 in the hospital Bhagwan Mahavir Medica Super specialty Hospital, Ranchi due to Cardigenic shock. Further case is that complainant applied for payment of insured money Rs. 3,00,000/- along with all papers as it was demanded by the O.Ps. but no payment was made.  Further case is that legal notice was served having no impact hence this case has been filed.

3.            W.S. has been filed by O.Ps. mentioning therein that inspite of demand for filing of the papers complainant has not provided it hence vide letter dt. 02.01.2018 her claim has been  repudiated with observation that company can re-evaluate and re-consider the claim if the documents will be provided by the complainant but till now those required documents have not been provided to the company, therefore, there is no question of not paying the amount. Further reply is that case is pre-matured because no documents have been provided to the insurance co. hence there is no cause of action for the case. Further reply is that it is true that husband of the complainant has obtained alleged insurance policy for the alleged period. Further it is reply that since no cause of action has arised hence case is pre-matured and liable to be dismissed.

From perusal of the papers submitted by the complainant it appears that the husband of the complainant has obtained insurance policy from O.Ps. As per insurance Co. some papers are wanting hence for want of fulfillment of legal criteria claim has been repudiated with liberty to the complainant to provide required documents on which O.Ps. will  re-consider the claim .  

     In the given facts we are of the opinion that this case is liable to be disposed off with certain observations in the following manner:-

1. That complainant shall provide all required documents to the O.Ps. within 60 days from today. On receipt of those documents as demanded vide letter dt. 02.01.2018 O.Ps. Insurance Co. shall process the claim of the complainant within further 60 days from the date of receipt of those documents. It is made clear that except the documents demanded vide letter dt. 02.01.2018 O.Ps. shall not demand any more document. Further O.Ps. shall inform this Commission regarding action taken within 4 months from today.
2. That in case, grievance of the complainant is not settled then she will have liberty to file case afresh on fresh cause of action. Accordingly this case is being disposed off with above observation.