BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM: KURNOOL

Present: Sri. T.Sundara Ramaiah, B.Com B.L., President

And

Sri. M.Krishna Reddy, M.Sc., M.Phil., Male Member

And

         Smt. S.Nazeerunnisa, B.A., B.L., Lady Member

Wednesday the 1^st day of February, 2012

C.C.No.94/2011

Between:

T.Venkateswaramma,W/o T.Venkata Sivaiah,

House Wife, D.No.3-182,Meedivemula Village,Orvakal Mandal - 518 010,Kurnool District.                                                             

…Complainant

                                       -Vs-

1. The General Manager,K.D.C.C. Bank Limited,

   D.No.79-103, Krishna Nagar,Kurnool - 518 002.

2. M/S Oriental Insurance Company Limited,Represented by its Divisional Manager,

   Bhupal Complex, D.No.40-132, Park Road,Kurnool - 518 001.        

                 ...Opposite ParTies

This complaint is coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri S.Siva Rama Krishna Prasad, Advocate for complainant and Sri K.Rama Krishna Rao, Advocate for opposite party No.1 and Sri L.Hari Hara Natha Reddy, Advocate for opposite party No.2 and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following.

                                     ORDER

(As per Smt. S.Nazeerunnisa, Lady Member)

   C.C. No.94/2011

1.     This complaint is filed under section 12 of C. P. Act, 1986 praying:-

1. To direct the opposite parties to settle the claim of the complainant which was repudiated by the opposite party No.2 on 06-06-2011;

1. To award a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards  compensation for causing mental agony to the complainant by the opposite party No.2;

1. To award cost of the complaint;
   •  
2. To grant such other relief or reliefs as the Honourable Forum deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

2.    The case of the complainant in brief is as under:- The complainant is the wife of Late Sri T.Venkata Sivaiah, who died in an accident on 13-05-2010 at about 4.00 P.M.  The deceased was proceeding from Kurnool to Meedivemula Village on a motor cycle.  He fell down from it, sustained injuries, and admitted in Government Hospital, and died on 14-05-2010.   The deceased took the policy from opposite party No.2 through opposite party No.1, for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-.  The complainant being, the nominee submitted a claim to opposite party No.2.  Opposite party No.2 repudiated the claim without any reasonable cause.  There is deficiency of service by not settling the claim of the complainant.  Hence the complaint.

3.     Opposite party No. filed counter stating that the deceased Sri T.Venkata Sivaiah is not the member of opposite party No.1. He was the member of PACS Nannur, which is an autonomous body.  Opposite party No.1 is neither a proper nor necessary party to the dispute.  The Forum has no jurisdiction.   There is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party No.1.  The complaint is liable to be dismissed.

Opposite party No.2 filed written version stating that the complaint is not maintainable.  It is barred by limitation.  It is admitted that the deceased by name Sri T.Venkata Sivaiah took the policy from opposite party No.2 through opposite party No.1.  It is covered under the Group Janatha Personal Accident Policy No.433100/47/2010/6046.  The period is from 23-02-2010 to midnight of 22-02-2011.  It covers only accidental deaths.  Opposite party No.2 stated that the deceased was suffering from the preexisting disease of fits/epilepsy.  While the deceased was proceeding from Kurnool, he was attacked with fits, he fell down from the motor cycle, sustained injuries, and later died in the hospital.  The company is not liable to pay any compensation as per the terms and conditions of the policy.  So opposite party No.2 repudiated the claim of the complainant.   There is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite part No.2.  The complaint is liable to be dismissed.

 4.    On behalf of the complainant Ex.A1 to A3 are marked and sworn affidavit of the complainant is filed.  On behalf of the opposite parties Ex.B1 to B6 are marked and sworn affidavits of the opposite parties 1 and 2 are filed.

5.     Both sides filed written arguments.

6.     Now the points that arise for consideration are:

1. Whether the complaint is barred by time?

1. Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of Opposite Parties?

1. Whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs as prayed for?

1. To what relief?

7.      POINT No.i :- Admittedly the deceased Sri T.Venkata Sivaiah took the policy from opposite party No.2 through opposite party No.1 under Ex.B1.  Ex.B1 is the policy copy along with terms and conditions of the policy.  The accident took place on 13-05-2010 and he died on 14-05-2010.  The complainant being the nominee submitted claim to opposite party No.2 and opposite party No.2 repudiated the same on 06-06-2011 under Ex.B6.  It is the case of the opposite party No.2 that the complaint is not filed within the period of limitation.  Under section 24 (a) C.P. Act 1986 the period of limitation to file a complaint before the District Forum is two years from the date on which the cause of action has arisen.  In the present case the accident took place on 13-05-2010 and insured died on 14-05-2010.  The insurance company repudiated the claim on 06-06-2011 and the complaint is filed on 15-06-2011.  The complaint is well in time and it is not barred by period of limitation.

8.      Points ii and iii:- Admittedly the deceased obtained Ex.B1, Group Janatha Personal Accident Policy bearing No.433100/47/2010/6046 covering the period from 23-02-2010 to 22-02-2011 issued by opposite party No.2 through opposite party No.1.  The main contention of opposite party No.2 is that the deceased was suffering from preexisting disease i.e., (fits), that on the day of accident also, while he was returning from Kurnool to his house, he fell down from the motor Cycle due to fits, sustained injuries and died in the hospital.  Ex.B2 is the F.I.R. copy in Crime No.90/2010 dated 15-06-2010 where in the complainant herself admitted the above said facts.    

The learned counsel appearing for the complainant contended that the deceased did not anticipate the incident, suddenly after he fell down from bike, he was attacked with fits, and due to injuries, he died accidentally.  To support his contention he cited a decision of National Commission in First Appeal No.417/2005 Debendranath Nayak – Vs – New India Assurance Company Limited and others where in the Honourable National Commission held that the evidence on record established the death of deceased was caused accidentally and not from insanity.  The facts of the present case are different from the facts of the case cited above.  There is satisfactory evidence on record. In the F.I.R. (Ex.B2) Inquest Report (Ex.B3) and (Ex.B5) final Report under section 174 Cr. P.C. it is clearly noted that the deceased was suffering from preexisting disease i.e., fits/epilepsy and on 13-05-2010 he fell down from the motor Cycle due to fits while he was returning to Meedivemula Village from Kurnool Town, and sustained injuries and died in hospital on 14-05-2010.   There is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties.  In view of the evidence available we are of the opinion that the complainant is not entitled for any relief. 

9.     In the result, the complaint is dismissed without costs.

        Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open bench on this the 1^st day of February, 2012.

Sd/-                                      Sd/-                                 Sd/-

MALE MEMBER                      PRESIDENT                 LADY MEMBER

                                 APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

                                    Witnesses Examined

For the complainant : Nil                 For the opposite parties : Nill

List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-

Ex.A1                Photo copy of F.I.R in Crime No.90/2010 Oravakal

                P.S. dated 14-05-2010.

Ex.A2.       Photo copy of Post Mortem Certificate issued by

                Assistant Professor, Department of Forensic Medicine,

                Kurnool Medical College, Kurnool, dated 14-05-2010.

Ex.A3                Repudiation letter of opposite party No.2 to

opposite party No.1 dated 06-06-2011.

List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties:-

Ex.B1                Policy bearing No.433100/47/2010/6046 along with

                terms and conditions.

Ex.B2                Photo copy of F.I.R in Crime No.90/2010 Oravakal P.S

                dated 14-05-2010.

Ex.B3                Photo copy of Inquest Report dated 14-05-2010.

Ex.B4                Photo copy of Post-Mortem Certificate issued by

Assistant Professor, Department of Forensic Medicine,

Kurnool Medical College, Kurnool, dated 14-05-2010.

Ex.B5                Photo copy of Final Report filed by the Orvakal P.S, in

Crime No.90/2010, dated 15-06-2010.

Ex.B6                Photo copy of Repudiation letter of opposite party

                No.2 to opposite party No.1 dated 06-06-2011.

 Sd/-                                             Sd/-                                    Sd/-

MALE MEMBER                 PRESIDENT                   LADY MEMBER

    // Certified free copy communicated under Rule 4 (10) of the A.P.S.C.D.R.C. Rules, 1987//

Copy to:-

Complainant and Opposite parties  :

Copy was made ready on             :

Copy was dispatched on               :