In  the  Court  of  the

Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Unit -I, Kolkata,

8B, Nelie Sengupta Sarani, Kolkata-700087.

CDF/Unit-I/Case No.  101 / 2005

1)           Mrs. Sankari Chattopadhyay,

29, S.M.P. Sarani, P.O. Barrackpore,

Kolkata-7000120.                                                   ---------- Complainant

---Verses---

1)           The Manager, Credit Card Operations,

ICICI Bank Ltd.,

3A, Gurusaday Dutta Road,

P.S. Gariahat, Kolkata-700019.

2)           The National Manager,

Credit Operations, ICICI Bank Ltd.,

P.O. Box No. 7931, Tulsiwadi, P.O.

Mumbai-400034.                                                    ---------- Opposite Party

Present :           Sri S. K. Majumdar, President.

                        Sri T.K. Bhattachatya, Member.

Order No.    30   Dated 09/11/2009.

Complainant, Sankari Chattopadhyay by filing a Petition of Complaint under Section 12  of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 dated 14.03.2005 has prayed for issuing direction upon the O.P. to pay the insurance claim of Rs. 5,00,000.00, Rs. 10,000.00 as compensation and Rs. 1,000.00 as litigation cost payable by the O.Ps.

It is the specific case of the Complainant that her husband, now deceased, Dilip Kr. Chattopadhyay during his lifetime purchased an ICICI Bank Solid Gold Credit Card bearing No. 4477 4700 3807 5009 having credit limit of Rs. 49,000.00 and cash limit of 40% of the credit limit valid from  03.2001 to 03.2003 from ICICI Bank from its branch office at 3A, Gurusaday Dutta Road, P.S. Gariahat, Kolkata-700 019 in which his wife was the nominee for getting all the benefits from the ICICI Bank. According to the terms and conditions of the said Solid Gold Card members are entitled to get a personal accident insurance benefit to the extent of Rs. 5,00,000.00.

Unfortunately, on 28.07.2008 Dilip Kumar Chattopadhyay met with a motor accident and died. After the death of her husband the Petitioner intimated the matter to the O.Ps and as per their instruction submitted Claim Form duly filled in alongwith the FIR, Post-mortem Report, Ration Card, Death Certificate, Indemnity Bond for getting insurance claim of Rs. 5,00,000.00. On 16.04.2002 the petitioner sent Nomination Form duly filled in according to the instruction of the Bank and they acknowledged it on 27.06.2002. She did not get any reply, but suddenly by a letter dated 13.12.2003 she was informed by the said Bank that there would not be any insurance application on the Credit Card as the Credit Card was not activated by the Card Holder which is contrary to the terms and conditions of the Bank. The Petitioner again sent letter to them dated 15.03.2004 requesting them to reconsider her lawful claim, but the Bank did not pay any heed to it and as a result the petitioner suffered a lot for such repudiation of her lawful claim after a lapse of 2 years which has caused stupendous mental pain and agony and thereafter finding no other alternative she has filed the instant case for deficiency of service on the part of the O.Ps with the aforesaid prayers.

The O.Ps on 15.09.2005 filed a Written Objection and challenged the maintainability of the case in its present form and law.

It is their specific case that the alleged non-payment of insurance claims the ICICI Bank is in no way concerned nor related to inasmuch as the subject matter of dispute comes entirely under the control and management of the concerned insurance company and accordingly they have alleged that the claim of the Complainant is false, frivolous and baseless. Their further case is that sometime in the month of September, 2000 the husband of the Complainant since deceased applied for a Credit Card to ICICI Bank Ltd. wherein he expressly and categorically agreed and assured to obtain the Credit Card terms and conditions governing the issuance and use of the Card and bound by such terms and conditions as may be laid down from time to time. And during his lifetime he used the Credit Card and according to the terms and conditions of the Card Member the insurance company is solely liable for settlement of the claim and the Card Member shall not hold the Bank responsible in any manner either for compensation processing of claim etc., and accordingly they have prayed for dismissal of the case.

Decision with reasons : 

National Insurance Co. has been impleaded as O.P. No. 4 by way of an Amendment Petition filed by the Complainant. In paragraph 12 of the Written Version of the O.Ps dated 01.09.2005 they have categorically stated that the subject matter of dispute comes exclusively under the purview, control and management of the concerned insurance company and the insurance company has not been made a party to this case. Thereafter the insurance company has been impleaded as O.P. No. 4. On the other hand in their letter dated 13.12.2003 addressed to Dilip Kr. Chattopadhyay, now dead, the husband of the Complainant, they have categorically stated that “With regard to your query relating to Insurance on Mr. Chattopadhyay’s Credit Card we would like to inform you that there would not be any insurance applicable on the Credit Card as the Credit Card has not been activated by the Card Holder”. So, in order to repudiate the claim of insurance of the petitioner, the O.Ps have taken a double stand. In their letter referred to above they have taken the plea of non-activation of the Card in question, and their second stand is mis-joinder of necessary party, ;i.e., National Insurance Co.. But we have already said that National Insurance Co. has already been impleaded as O.P. No. 4.

Admittedly, Dilip Kumar Chattopadhyay, the husband of the Complainant and the original card holder died out of motor accident. It has been categorically stated in paragraph 13 (3) that “Immediately after issuance of the said Card as aforesaid the husband of the Complainant since deceased started using and enjoying the same under the terms and conditions referred to hereinabove”.

“IV That with the issuance of the said Card the husband of the Complainant, since deceased was offered a comprehensive insurance related benefits which included personal accident insurance”. In view of this averments there is no difficulty to hold that the Complainant is nominee of her husband now dead as well as the holder of Card No. 4477 4700 3807 5009 is the beneficiary of the insurance and in terms of the insurance she is entitled to get benefit of the insurance on the Card in question, if not otherwise barred by any provision of Law contrary to the Terms of Agreement. 

It appears from perusal of the record that on 01.09.2005 the O.P. Nos. 1 & 2, viz., the Manager, Credit Card Operations and National Manager, Credit Card Operations, ICICI Bank Ltd. filed their Written Versions and Complainant filed an Affidavit on 06.03.2006 under Order No. 1 Rule 10 read with Section 151 of the C.P.Code for addition of ICICI Bank Ltd. and National Insurance Co. as parties of this case and their prayer was allowed and ICICI Bank Ltd. and the National Insurance Co. Ltd. were impleaded as O.P.  Nos. 3 & 4 respectively in terms of the Order No. 13 dated 16.11.2006. But it is not understood that on 12.06.2006 the O.Ps filed a Written Objection against the Petition of Complaint praying for adding ICICI Bank and National Insurance Co. as parties in this case because in the Written Objection filed by the O.Ps No. 1 & 2 they had categorically stated that ICICI Bank Ltd. and the National Insurance Co. Ltd. are the necessary parties. National Insurance Co. as it appears on perusal of the record although added as O.P. No. 4 has neither filed its Written Version nor it has filed its Evidence on Oath nor any documents. Further it appears on perusal of the record that the Brief Notes of Argument has been filed on behalf of the O.P. Nos. 1, 2 & 3 and not for the National Insurance Co., the O.P. No. 4. In view of this position if the Complainant succeeds to prove her case in that event an exparte Order can be passed against the O.P. No. 4, the National Insurance Co. Ltd.

In the letter addressed to Dilip Kumar Chattopadhyay dated 08.03.2001 by Mr. A. R. Ramesh, National Manager, Credit Operations, he has admitted credit limit of Rs. 49,000.00 and a cash limit of 40% of the credit limit. In the proposal of Nomination Form we find that Rs. 5,00,000.00 is the insurance claim and it appears from Claim Form that after the death of Dilip Kumar Chattopadhyay the substituted Complainant Sankari Chattopadhyay is the claimant of insurance. We have also perused the FIR, Post Mortem Report. It also appears from Indemnity Bond dated 09.01.2002 by the Claimant Sankari Chattopadhyay wherein she has stated that having been appointed as assignee by the insured Dilip Kumar Chattopadhyay she had undertaken to indemnify the National Insurance Co. for claim of Rs. 5,00,000.00. From the letter dated 06.02.2002 of ICICI Bank that they have confirmed cancellation of Credit Card No. 4407 4700 3807 5009 and they have regularized the Card A/c. in the letter dated 16.04.2002 of the Complainant, Sankari Chattopadhyay. She has prayed for settlement of insurance claim against the death of her husband in respect of the said Credit Card.. She has also filled up and filed the Nomination Form and the ICICI Bank received it also. Again on 20.08.2003 the Complainant also sent one letter for settlement of the insurance claim by the ICICI Bank. In her letter dated 07.12.2003 the Complainant has intimated and requested the ICICI Bank to enquire the whole matter for settlement of her claim of insurance. But in their letter dated 13.12.2003 the ICICI Bank has refused the claim of insurance by the Complainant on the ground that the Credit Card has not been activated by the Card Holder. But in her letter dated 15.03.2004 the Complainant has categorically stated that she received the reply of her letter after a lapse of more than 2 years wherein the ICICI Bank has informed her that her claim of insurance is not applicable because the Card was not activated. She has also stated and informed the ICICI Bank that the Card was valid for the period from March, 2001 to March, 2003 and her husband died on 28.07.2001, i.e., within the valid period and she submitted her insurance claim on 25.01.2002 to the Manager, Credit Card Operations, ICICI Bank, i.e., within the six months from the date of the death of her husband.. Further in their letter dated 14.03.2002 they had instructed the Complainant to send in filled-in Nomination papers to process her case and so the Card was active during the period of submission of her claim. So the plea of refusal of the claim of insurance on the ground that the Card was not activated by the Card Holder does not hold good. We have also perused the Advocate’s letter dated 16.12.2004 of the Complainant addressed to the Manager, Credit Card Operations, ICICI Bank wherein it has been categorically claimed for getting insurance of Rs. 5,00,000.00. We have also perused the Examination in-Chief of the Complainant filed on 02.11.2005 and the contents of her Evidence are in tune with the contents of the pleadings made out in her Petition of Complaint. In order to facilitate the process of settlement of her claim she also submitted one application sworn on Affidavit for Discovery of Documents dated 19.06.2008.

In their Written Argument they have categorically stated that only upon fulfillment of certain terms and conditions the claim of insurance to the nominees of the insured person on submission of filled up Nomination Form and mailing of the same to the ICICI Bank Credit Card Operations to their office at Mumbai-400 034. According to the terms and conditions this is applicable in case of Rail/Road accident for primary Card Members only. Dilip Kr. Chattopadhyay, the original insured person died out of motor accident. According to the Petition of Complaint O.P. No. 2 is the National Manager, Credit Operations, ICICI Bank Ltd., ICICI Credit Card Operations, P.O. Box No. 7931, Tulsiwadi, Post Mumbai, Mumbai-400 034. So we find that the Complainant has complied with the terms and conditions as laid down for total payment of insurance, and the conditions laid down in the Exclusion Clause of Liability of the ICICI Bank are not applicable in the instant case. So, refusal of the claim of insurance of the Complainant is not only baseless but also amounts to gross negligence of service on the part of the O.Ps.

Further, the refusal of claim of insurance of the Petitioner as contained in the Written Objection has not been substantiated by the O.Ps by filing any document far to speak of cogent documents. Therefore, considering the facts, circumstances, evidence on record we are of the opinion that the -Petitioner is entitled to get the claim of insurance.

Hence ordered

that the Petition of Complaint succeeds on contest against O.P. Nos. 1, 2 & 3 and exparte against O.P. No. 4, the National Insurance Co. Ltd.The O.Ps are accordingly directed to make payment of insurance claim of Rs. 5,00,000.00 (Rupees Five Lac) only to the Complainant and award of compensation of Rs. 20,000.00 (Rupees Twenty Thousand) only is given to the Petitioner and she is also awarded litigation cost of Rs. 5,000.00  (Rupees Five Thousand) only. So the grand total of Rs. 5,25,000.00 (Rupees Five Lac Twenty Five Thousand) only is to be paid by the O.Ps to the Complainant positively within 3O days from the date of communication of this Order failing which it will carry interest @ 10% per annum till full realization. Fees paid are correct. Supply Certified Copies of this Order to the parties on payment of prescribed fees.

        ____Sd-________                                               _____Sd-_______

          MEMBER                                                          PRESIDENT