DATE OF DISPOSAL: 10.10.2023

PER:   SMT. SARITRI PATTANAIK, MEMBER (W)

The factual matrix of the case is that the complainant has filed this consumer complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, alleging deficiency in service against the Opposite Parties (in short the O.Ps.) and for redressal of her  grievance before this Commission.

2. The complainant is a self-employed and for further improvement in self-employment the complainant has a sole proprietorship shop at Berhampur. The complainant purchased a policy namely, “Twenty year Jeevan Surabhi Policy with profits (with Accident benefit)” bearing No.570011150 which was commenced from 28.03.1995 and the matured date was 28.03.2015 for sum assured of Rs.50,000/-. The said policy was purchased from the O.P.No.2 in the relevant time. For improvement of said shop, the complainant mortgaged said personal p0olicy No.570011150 with O.P.No.3 and obtained a loan bearing loan account No.13513131287 for Laghu Udyog Credit GB for Rs.2,00,000/-. Meanwhile, the said policy was matured on the stipulated date 28.03.2015 and on maturity of the said policy, the O.P.No.3 has intimated about ‘Assignment of LIC policy of Baidyanath Choudhury, maturity claim to the O.P.No.1 bearing No. UGB/8079/ADV/97 dated 23.06.2015. The O.P.No.1 has duly acknowledged the Annexure C but did not choose to reply to the O.P.No.4, the reasons bests known to the O.P.No.1. Again on 13.07.2015, the O.P.No.3 sent another intimation bearing No.UGB/8079/ADV/110 enclosing original insurance Policy Bond No. 570011150alongwith maturity claim form, NEFT form to the O.P.No.1. The O.P.No.1 duly acknowledges the said letter alongwith the documents on 14.07.2015and issued a acknowledgement slip to O.P.NMo.3 but did not choose to settle the matter, the reasons best known to them. When the O.P.No.1 did not settle the issues on receipt of the Annexure C & D till 2017 and at the same time the loan account of the complainant was not closed at O.P.No.3 Bank due to wanting of final claim amount from the O.P.No.1. In constraint, the complainant issued a Registered with AD advocate notice through ‘The Law Consortium, Gajapatinagar, Berhampur bearing Notice No. 21/28.06.2017to both O.P.No.1 & 3. The O.P.No.1 replied that ‘the policy belongs to our Branch-II, so we sending the same to Branch-II’. In spite of several approaches both in writing and in person to the O.P.No,.1 and 2, no attempt was made by the O.P.No.2 to pay the final claim amount as per the terms and conditions of the said policy bond of the complainant to the O.P.No.3 and/or complainant.  As such the O.P. No.1 & 2 are having vicarious liability to pay the complainant the claim amount and also to compensates the losses with interest sustained since the  date of maturity of the policy. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps, the complainant prayed to direct the all the O.Ps are jointly and severally liable in the instant case, direct the O.P.No.1 & 2 to refund the final claim amount to the O.P.No.2 or entire matured amount of Rs.50,000/- to the complainant as per terms and conditions of the policy bond, compensation of Rs.12,500/- and litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- in the best interest of justice.

3. Upon notice the O.P.No.1 and 2 appeared through his advocate and filed written version. The O.P.No.3 neither chooses to appear nor filed any written version. Hence the O.P.No.3 is set exparte on dated 16.01.2019.

3. The O.P. No.1 and 2 filed written version through his advocate. It is stated that the complainant has filed the above complaint with all false and frivolous allegations. The O.Ps denies all those allegations as vague and concocted. The complainant shall put to strict proof of the allegations those are not specifically admitted therein. The assertions made at para-3, it is not true that the said Policy bearing No.570011150 commenced on 28.03.1995 for sum assured Rs.50,000/- which has been matured on 28.03.2015. In fact the sum assured is Rs.30,000/- under the same policy. The other assertions made there under are not disputed. After receipt of the advocate’s notice the O.P.No.2 could enquired and found that the above policy is servicing in their Branch and assigned in favour of the O.P.No.3 and the claims remains unsettled due to want of original policy bond, Discharge voucher and NEFT particulars from O.P.No.3. The same is not yet complied either by the O.P.No.3 or by the complainant till date. The O.P.No.2 is ever ready to settle the maturity claim on receipt of the above requisites viz. Original Policy Bond, Discharge voucher and NEFT particulars from the O.P.No.3 as the policy was assigned in its favour. The complainant had assigned the same policy in favour of the O.P.No.3 Utkal Grameen Bank, Courtpeta Branch, Berhampur towards co-lateral Security against his loan A/C vide No.13513131287 for laghu Udyog credit RGB for Rs.200000/ which fact is admitted by him in his above complaint. As the said assignee Banker O.P.No.3 claimed the maturity amount submitting the original policy, NEFT form etc. Subsequently, the above O.P. remitted Rs.21,750/- which has been payable towards maturity proceeds, by means of a cheque baring No.195838 dated 15.12.2018 of Axis Bank to the said Bank as against his above loan. In view of the above as the maturity value i.e. Rs.21,750/- as per the eligibility under the policy has been already paid since 15.12.2018, instead of languishing the above matter any longer, it would be just and proper to drop the above case forthwith for the ends of natural justice, otherwise the O.P. LIC of India will be highly prejudiced.

4. On the date of final hearing the advocate for complainant and O.Ps are present. We heard argument from both sides at length. We perused the complaint petition, written version, written argument and documents available in the case record. It is apparent that, the op no.2 have remitted the maturity amount a sum of Rs.21,750/- only through cheque bearing no.:195838/dated:15.12.2018 in favour of the op no.3 only after receipt of the notice from the Commission in the instant case. It is also appeared that, prior to maturity of the said policy in question, the op no.3 has also claimed to the op no. 1 & 2 but not fruitful. Further it is manifest from the submission of the documents by the op no.2 that, there was no interest paid on the maturity amount for the delayed period i.e., from 28.03.2015 to 15.12.2018.In view of the principles laid down in Polymat India P. Ltd. and Anr. v. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Ors reported in AIR 2005 SC 286 the op no.2 should have strictly followed the contract of insurance executed between the parties and act expediently to settle the claim. In the instant case, the op no.2 has not taken any tangible steps to pay the interest for the delayed period when claimed by the complainant. The law is well settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in M/s Vijay Industries v. M/s Natl Technologies Ltd., in Civil Appeal No.:7352 of 2008reported in Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1400338/ that, the petitioners shall pay simple interest on admitted amount for the delayed period from the date of amount became due till it is paid.

In the result, the complaint is allowed against the opposite party no. 2 and dismissed against the opposite party no. 1 & 3. In our considered views, the op no.2 is directed to pay interest on the admitted maturity amounting of Rs.21,750/- at the rate of 9% pa to the complainant for the period from the date of amount became due till it is paid i.e., from 28.03.2015 to 15.12.2018 within 45 days from the date of receipt of this order failing which the complainant is at liberty to recover the said interest amount from the op no.2 in accordance to the statutory provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

This case is disposed of accordingly.

The Judgment be uploaded on the www.confonet.nic.in for the perusal of the parties.

A certified copy of this Judgment be provided to all the parties free of cost as mandated by the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 or they may download same from the www.confonet.nic.in to treat the same as if copy of the order received from this Commission.

The file is to be consigned to the record room along with a copy of this Judgment.

Pronounced on 10.10.2023.