West Bengal

Paschim Midnapore

CC/57/2015

Smt. Arati Dey - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Post Master, Raj Ganja (E.D.B.) - Opp.Party(s)

30 Sep 2015

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

PASCHIM MEDINIPUR.

                             

Bibekananda Pramanik, President,

And

  Kapot Chattopadhyay, Member.

   

Complaint Case No.57/2015

                                                       

                                                             Smt. Arati Dey……………..….……Complainant.

Versus

                 1)The Post Master;

                  2)Sr. Superintendent of Post Office…..Opp. Parties.

 

              For the Complainant : Mr. Swapan Bhattacherjee, Advocate.

              For the O.P.                : Postal Department.

 

Decided on: - 30/09/2015

                               

ORDER

                          Bibekananda Pramanik, President - Facts of the case, in brief, is that the complainant is a bona fide policy holder of Postal Life Insurance being policy no.R-WB-SB-EA-15599.  As per policy condition, the complainant used to deposit Rs.780/- only per month since November 2003 and she has already paid a total sum of Rs.8,976/- only to the opposite party no.1 as premium till February 2015.  In spite of that, the opposite party no.1 did not issue any policy certificate to the complainant although she was assured that the policy certificate will be issued within 6 months from the date of payment of first premium money.  In spite of several requests, the opposite parties neither issued policy certificate nor did they refund the money which has already been deposited by the complainant. Hence, the complaint praying for directing the opposite party to refund that the amount of Rs.8,976/- to the complainant and Rs.5,000/- as compensation and Rs.500/- as litigation cost.

Contd…………..P/2

                                                                            

( 2 )

                        The opposite parties have contested this case by filling a written statement. It is stated by the opposite parties that the complainant is the policy holder Rural Postal Life Insurance Policy and her proposal was accepted on 23/09/2003 and the policy was allotted vide policy no.R-WB-SB-EA-15599.  As per departmental rule when a proposal is

                  accepted, one premium receipt book is issued and a policy bond is generated. As per rule, premium receipt book and policy bond is handed over together to the policy holder.  Since premium receipt book is available with the complainant, so it implies that the policy bond was also handed over to the complainant and the same has been misplaced by the complainant.  It is stated that the complainant can very well apply for duplicate policy bond and if it is so applied, the duplicate bond will be issued after observing all formalities as per departmental rules.  It is further stated that the complainant has discontinued payment of monthly premium from March, 2015 and as per rule, any insurance coverage will not be paid to the policy holder on the discontinued policy in case of death of policy holder.  So, the policy holder after making payment of  premium up to date, may apply for surrender.

Point for decision

                     

Is the complainant entitled to get the reliefs, as sought for ?

 

Decision with reasons

                             At the very outset, it is to be stated that neither the complainant nor the opposite parties have adduced any sort evidence, either oral  or documentary but they have relied upon some documents.  The main grievance of the complainant of this case is that although she has been paying regular premium but the policy bond has not been issued to her.  As against this, it is the case of the opposite parties that since the premium receipt book has been delivered to the complainant, so it implies that the policy bond was also handed over to the policy holder.  Opposite parties failed to produce any document to show that they handed over the policy bond to the complainant.  At the time of hearing of argument,   opposite parties agreed that the duplicate policy bond will be supplied to the complainant after observing all legal formalities and on receiving necessary application from the complainant.  Ld. Lawyer of the complainant submitted that if duplicate policy bond is issued, then the complainant intends to continue the said policy and therefore, Ld. Lawyer for the complainant did not insist for refund of the premium money so paid by the complainant.

            Contd…………..P/3

                                                                              

( 3 )

                                In view of such submission of both parties,

                                                              it is ordered,

                                                                    that the complaint case is allowed on consent with a direction to the opposite parties to issue duplicate policy bond to the complainant on receipt on proper application and to revive the policy on receipt of dues premium of the policy and after observing all legal formalities.  We, therefore, make no order as to cost.                                                 

            

               Dictated & Corrected by me

             

                           President                                    Member                                   President

                                                                                                                           District Forum

                                                                                                                       Paschim Medinipur