Date of Filing: 04-01-2016 Date of Final Order: 17-03-2017
Sri Gurupada Mondal, President.
This is an application under Section 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 praying for direction to the O.Ps to pay Rs.21,000/- along with interest and other reliefs.
The case of the Complainant in short is that one Rabindra Nath Ray, now deceased, husband of the Complainant took RPLI Policy being No. R-WB-EA-352883 dated 14/02/2012 from the O.Ps and had been paying the premium on regular basis against the said insurance policy and nominated his wife, the present Complainant viz. Barnali Ray (Adhikary). The husband of the Complainant expired on 27/08/2012.
Thereafter, the Complainant, being the sole nominee of the beneficiary of the deceased husband, preferred claim application before the O.Ps and the Complainant received Rs.63,000/- from the said O.Ps and Rs.21,000/- remained due from the O.Ps. Inspite of several demands from the O.Ps, the O.Ps did not pay the said amount of Rs.21,000/- to the Complainant. Accordingly, the Complainant and her family members have been suffering from great financial problem and also suffering from mental pain & agony.
Accordingly, the Complainant has filed the instant case with a prayer for direction to the O.Ps to pay Rs.21,000/- along with interest, Rs.25,000/- as compensation for mental pain & agony, Rs.25,000/- for deficiency in service and Rs.10,000/- towards the cost of litigation.
The O.P. No.1 has filed W/V denying all material allegations contending inter-alia that the Complainant has no cause of action to file the instant case, the case is not maintainable and the case is misconceived one and this Forum has no jurisdiction to try this case.
Specific case of the O.P. No.1 is that RPLI Policy being No. R-WB-EA-352883 dated 14/02/2012 was forwarded to the Postmaster, Cooch Behar Head Post Office on 03/04/2014 and as per report, Postmaster, Cooch Behar Head Post Office handed over it to the Deputy Postmaster, Cooch Behar Head Post Office for issuing cheque after pay order but due to some inadvertence, the sanctioned Memo could not be traced but a photocopy of the said Memo was forwarded to the Postmaster, Cooch Behar Head Post Office for issuing cheque in favour of the Complainant.
It is also the case of the O.P. No.1 that a cheque being No.999256 dated 15/06/2016 for Rs.21,000/- was issued in favour of the Complainant against the Policy being No. R-WB-EA-352883 dated 14/02/2012. The O.P. No.1 paid the dues amount without any further delay. The O.P. No.1 had no negligence on his part and the claim is not tenable in accordance with law. Accordingly, the O.P. No.1 prays for dismissal of the case with cost.
The O.P. No.2 has filed W/V denying all material allegations, contending inter-alia that the instant application is not maintainable.
The Complainant has no cause of action to file this case and the case is bad for non-joinder of the necessary party and prays for dismissal of the case with costs.
Considering the pleadings of both sides, the following points are framed in order to arrive at a decision.
POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION
- Is the Complainant a Consumer as per Section 2(1)(d)(ii) of the C.P. Act, 1986?
- Has this Forum jurisdiction to entertain the instant complaint?
- Have the Opposite Parties any deficiency in service and are they liable in any way?
- Whether the Complainant is entitled to get relief/reliefs as prayed for?
DECISION WITH REASONS
We have gone through the record very carefully. Perused the entire documents in the record and also heard the argument as advanced by the parties at length.
Point No.1.
The husband of the Complainant had taken R.P.L.I policy being No. R-WB-EA 352883 from the O.P and the Complainant was nominated as nominee. The husband of the Complainant died and the Complainant filed an application to the O.P to pay the insured sum of Rs.84,000/-. The O.Ps were pleased to pay a sum of Rs.63,000/- but did not pay the rest amount of Rs.21,000/- to the Complainant. Therefore, the Complainant is a consumer as per C.P. Act, 1986. This point is therefore decided in favour of the Complainant.
Point No.2.
In our earlier decision, we hold that the Complainant is a consumer as per C.P. Act, 1986. The Complainant and the O.Ps are the resident of Cooch Behar and the claim amount of the Complainant is less than Rs.20,00,000/- and as such this Forum has jurisdiction to try this case.
Point No.3 & 4.
Both the points are taken up for the convenience of discussion as well as related with each other.
Admitted fact is that the husband of the petitioner viz. Rabindra Nath Roy took RPLI Policy being No. R-WB-EA-352883 from the O.P and paid premium to that effect. It is also the admitted fact as well as established by documentary evidence that the Policy Holder Rabindra Nath Roy died on 27/08/2012. We find from the evidence of the Complainant that the Complainant was nominated as nominee against the said RPLI Policy. We also find from the evidence that after the death of Rabindra Nath Roy, the Complainant submitted claim application before the O.P Insurance Company and the O.P paid Rs.63,000/- out of Rs.84,000/- and Rs.21,000/- was due from the O.P.
It is the case of the O.P that inspite of repeated demands from the O.P by the Complainant, the O.P did not pay the dues amount of Rs.21,000/- to the Complainant and as a result of which the Complainant and her family members had been suffering a lot.
The O.P. No.1 & 2 have filed two separate W/V denying all allegations as alleged by the Complainant. According to the O.P. No.1 that they had no latches on their part. According to the O.P. No.1 that sanction Memo of RPLI Policy being No. R-WB-EA-352883 dated 14/02/2012 was forwarded to the Postmaster, Cooch Behar on 03/04/2014 and the same was handed over to Dy. Postmaster, Cooch Behar Head Post Office for issuing the cheque. But due to inadvertence, the said sanction Memo could not be traced. We find from the affidavit of the O.P. No.1 that during the pendency of this case, the O.P. No.1 paid Rs.21,000/- by issuing cheque being No.999256 dated 15/06/2016 to the Complainant. The Complainant did not raise any dispute over the said payment of Rs.21,000/-.
But from the evidence on record, we find that the O.P. No.1 did not pay the amount of Rs.21,000/- to the Complainant inspite of repeated demands of the Complainant. Accordingly, the Complainant was compelled to file the instant case against the O.P. No.1 & 2. The Complainant was being harassed due to non-payment of the dues of Rs.21,000/-. It amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the O.Ps.
Therefore, the Complainant is entitled to get compensation for mental pain & agony, deficiency in service and cost of the proceedings from the O.Ps. At the same time, the Complainant is also entitled to get interest from the date of filing of this case i.e. from 04/01/2016 till the payment was made on 14/06/2016 @ 8% P.A.
Both the points are disposed of accordingly.
Accordingly,
Ordered,
That the present case be and the same is allowed on contest in part with the cost of Rs.1,000/- against the O.Ps.
The Complainant do get interest @ 8% P.A. from 04/01/2016 to 14/06/2016 of the claim amount of Rs.21,000/-.
The Complainant do get Rs.3,000/- from the O.Ps for her mental pain & agony and Rs.2,000/- for deficiency in service. The O.P. No.1 & 2 are hereby directed to pay the aforesaid sum jointly and/or severally within 45 days from this date, failing which the O.Ps are liable to pay fine of Rs.50/- per day till realization.
Let a plain copy of this Order be supplied to the parties concerned by hand/by Registered Post with A/D forthwith, free of cost, for information & necessary action, as per rules.
Dictated and corrected by me.
