Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/68/2017

G.Venkatesh - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager, LIC of India - Opp.Party(s)

B.Ramesh

29 Jul 2022

ORDER

Date of Complaint Filed :14.12.2016

Date of Reservation      : 07.07.2022

Date of Order               : 29.07.2022

 

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (SOUTH), CHENNAI-3.

 

PRESENT:    TMT. B. JIJAA, M.L.,                                           : PRESIDENT

                       THIRU. T.R. SIVAKUMHAR, B.A., B.L.,           :  MEMBER  I 

                       THIRU. S. NANDAGOPALAN., B.Sc., MBA.,    : MEMBER II

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT No. 68/2017

FRIDAY, THE 29^th DAY OF JULY 2022

Sri. G. Venkatesh,

S/o Govindarajan,

233, LF Road,

Kachirayapalayam,

Chinnasalem,

Villupuram – 606 207.                                                       ... Complainant                               

 

..Vs..

1.The Chief Manager,

   L.I.C of India,

   Kallakurichi,

   Villupuram District.

 

2.The Regional Manager,

   L.I.C of India,

   Southern Region,

   L.I.C. Building,

   Annasalai,

   Chennai – 600 002.                                                  ...  Opposite Parties

 

******

Counsel for the Complainant             : M/s. B. Ramesh

Counsel for the Opposite Parties        : M/s. S. Mahendran

 

        On perusal of records and on endorsement made by the Complainant to teat the written arguments as oral arguments, and upon hearing the oral argument of the Opposite Parties, we delivered the following:

ORDER

Pronounced by the President Tmt. B. Jijaa, M.L.,

1.      The Complainant has filed this complaint as against the Opposite Party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and prays to direct the Opposite Parties to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards deficiency of service and also to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards mental agony and loss suffered by the Complainant.

2.     The averments of Complaint in brief are as follows:-

 

The Complainant had availed LIC Money Back Policy from the 1^st Opposite Party Life Insurance Company bearing Policy No.731401409, The sum assured is Rs.50,000/-. The Policy commenced on 30.10.2000 and matures on 28.10.2020. The yearly premium for the Policy was Rs.3136/-. On 18.11.2016 the Complainant went to the 1^st Opposite Party office to make the premium amount towards the policy by tendering old Rs.500/- and Rs.1000/- currencies. But the 1^st Opposite Party  refused to receive the old currencies and told him to not come to his Kallakurichi office again. On 08.11.2016 the Central Government announced that the old Rs.500/- and Rs.1000/- currencies were not valid from 24.11.2016 and the Government also announced that people can use the old currencies such as Rs.500 and Rs.1000 for bill payment. As per the guidelines of the Government the 1^st Opposite Party refused to receive the old currencies. This act of the 1^st Opposite Party clearly shows deficiency in service on their part and it was against the law of Consumer Protection act.  On 19.11.2016 the 1^st Opposite Party registered a complaint against the Opposite Parties vide case No.DEAID/E/2016/03348.  On 19.11.2016 the 1^st Opposite Party sent a reply stating that as per Government guidelines and as per the advice of his higher officers the old currencies and of Rs.500/- and Rs.1,000/- was not accepted and a Notice Board containing the same was kept at the entrance as well as at the payment counter for Public information. By the said mail the 1^st Opposite Party had admitted the facts of his visit as well as the instructions given to him to exchange the old currencies. The Divisional Manager, Vellore by his Reply letter dated 23.11.2016 had admitted the same. Hence the 1^st Opposite Party had acted against the guidelines of Reserve Bank of India, by refusing the old currency notes amounts to deficiency of service under Consumer Protection Act. On 22.11.2016 the Complainant had sent legal notice to the 1^st and 2^nd Opposite Parties but no response, from the same it would be clear the Opposite Parties committed deficiency of service and caused mental agony to the Complainant. Hence the complaint.

3.Written Version filed by the Opposite Parties in brief are as follows:-

          The Opposite Parties denied all the averments made in the complaint and submitted that the Complainant wanted to remit the old Rs.500/- & Rs.1000/- currency notes in the first Opposite Party's office at the time of demonetization policy announced by the central Government w.e.f 08.11.2016 midnight. As per the Government of India Gazette Notification No.2652 dated 08.11.2016 on the Withdrawal of legal Tender character of existing Rs.500/- and Rs.1000/- Bank Notes, the Executive Director (Finance and Accounts) of Life Insurance Corporation of India had issued administrative Instructions to all its offices under letter Ref CO: F&A: ED: dated 09.11.2016 regarding the Withdrawal of legal Tender character of existing Rs.500/- and Rs.1000/- bank notes and not to accept the same and to display the non acceptance of the same at the cash counter. According to this instruction the First Opposite Party had displayed the non acceptance of the Bank notes Rs.500/- and Rs.1000/- and the cashier had refused to accept the above currencies as per the instructions from the higher office and Government of India notification No.2652 dated 08.11.2016. The 1^st Opposite Party in the capacity of the Branch In-charge at Kallakuruchi branch and the Divisional Manager (Customer Relations) at Divisional Office, Vellore had clarified the Complainant the valid reasons for non acceptance of the Old Bank notes of Rs.500/- and Rs.1000/- for payment of Policy Premium of the Complainant. Further to the notification, the Government of India and the RBI had issued instructions time and after regarding the valid utility of defunct Bank Notes Rs.500/- and Rs.1000/-, that With banks struggling to cope with rush to get alternative currency, the government has extended use of old defunct Rs.500/- and Rs.1,000/- notes for paying household utility bills, fuel, taxes and fees and purchases from co-operative stores till November 24. While withdrawing Rs.500/- and Rs. 1,000 notes from the night of November 8-9, the government had allowed use of the old currency at government hospitals, railway ticketing, public transport, airline ticketing at airports, milk booths, crematoria/burial grounds and petrol pumps for 72 hours. This list was later expanded to include payments for metro rail tickets, highway and road toll, purchase of medicines on doctor prescription from the government and private pharmacies, LPG gas cylinders, railway catering, electricity and water bills and ASI monument entry tickets. Old and defunct currency can also be used for purchases at consumer co operative stores like Kendriya Bhandar with valid ID proof as also for paying court fee. But payments towards utility bills will be restricted to only individuals or households for arrears and/or current bills. No advance payments will be allowed. The Payment of Insurance Premium was not covered under the above utility instructions for the valid use of defunct Bank Notes. Hence there is no deficiency of service on part of the opposite Parties and the opposite Parties not liable to pay any compensation to the Complainant and same is liable to be dismissed.

4.   The Complainant submitted his Proof Affidavit and Written Arguments. On the side of the Complainant, documents Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-7  were marked. The Opposite Parties submitted his Proof Affidavit and Written Arguments. On the side of the Opposite Parties, documents Ex.B-1 to Ex.B-2, were marked.

 

5.     Points for Consideration

1.Whether this Commission has jurisdiction to entertain the complaint?

2.Whether the Opposite Parties committed deficiency of service?

3.Whether the Complainant is entitled for the reliefs claimed in the complaint and is entitled for any other relief/s?

Point No.1 and 2:-

        It is not in dispute that the Complainant had availed Insurance Policy of the Opposite Parties. It is also not in dispute that the Complainant had visited the 1^st Opposite Party for payment of premium on 18.11.2016.

It is in dispute that the 1^st Opposite Party had refused to receive the payment of premium made by way of Rs.500/- and Rs.1000/- due to denomination notified on 08.11.2016 by Government of India. The point to be considered is whether the denominations of Rs.500/- and Rs.1000/- can be received by the Opposite Parties as per the notification issued by the Government of India and the refusal made by the Opposite Parties is legally sustainable or not.

        As the 2^nd Opposite Party is the regional office of the 1^st Opposite Party, under section 11 (2)(a) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the complaint filed by the Complainant can be entertained by this Commission.

On perusal of Ex.A7, Ex.B-1 & Ex.B-2, it is clear that the Opposite Parties had not been notified to receive the old notes of denomination of Rs.500/- & Rs.1000/- and the 1^st Opposite Party has rightly refused to receive the premium paid by the Complainant as per the notification marked as Ex.B-2, followed by circular issued by Opposite Parties Central Office, under Ex.B-1. Even as per Ex.A-7 being the frequently asked questions from Reserve Bak of India’s Portal, the Opposite Parties were not authorised and permitted to receive high denomination bank notes of Rs.500/- and Rs.1000/-. Hence,  refusal of 1^st Opposite Party to receive the payment of LIC Premium made by the Complainant is legally sustainable and does not amounts to deficiency of service. Therefore we are of the considered view that the Opposite Parties have not committed any deficiency of service. Accordingly Point No.1 and 2 are answered.

Point No.3:-

    As discussed and decided Point No.1 in favour of the Opposite Parties, the Complainant is not entitled for the reliefs claimed in the Complainant and also not entitled for any other relief/s. Accordingly Point No.3 is answered.

       In the result, this complaint is dismissed. No cost.

Dictated to Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Commission, on 29^th of July 2022. 

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                 B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                        PRESIDENT

 List of documents filed on the side of the Complainant:-

 

Ex.A1	-	Copy of LIC of Money Back Policy
Ex.A2	-	Copy of receipt of premium payment made
Ex.A3	-	Copy of online Complaint made in Central Government Website
Ex.A4	-	Copy of reply letter of the 1st Opposite Party and Divisional Manager, Vellore
Ex.A5	-	Copy of legal notice dated 22.11.2016 sent to the Opposite Parties
Ex.A6	-	Copy of acknowledgement cards of the Opposite Parties
Ex.A7	-	Copy of the Guidelines of the RBI in respect of old currency notes

 

List of documents filed on the side of the Opposite Party:-

 

Ex.B1	09.11.2016	Copy of the LIC Zonal office letter to all the branch offices
Ex.B2	-	Copy of Press release of Ministry of Finance

 

 

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                   B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                         PRESIDENT