BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM: KURNOOL
Present: Sri. T.Sundara Ramaiah , B.Com B.L., President
And
Sri. M.Krishna Reddy , M.Sc., M.Phil., Male Member
And
Smt. S.Nazeerunnisa, B.A., B.L., Lady Member
Tuesday the 22nd day of March, 2011
C.C.No 73/10
Between:
T.Mukunda Rao, S/o T.Gopala Rao
1-3631-3, Muneppa Nagar, Kurnool.
…Complainant
-Vs-
- The Postal Superintendent,
Head Post Office Premises, Kurnool.
2. The Chief Post Master General O/o The Chief Post Master General,
A.P.Circle, Hyderabad - 500 001.
3. The Deputy Divisional Manager (PLI) O/o The Chief Post Master General,
A.P.Circle, Hyderabad - 500 001.
...Opposite Parties
This complaint is coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri M.Sivaji Rao, Advocate for complainant, and Sri M.D.V.Jogaiah Sarma Advocate opposite parties 1and 2 and opposite party No.3 set exparte and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following.
ORDER
(As per Sri. M.Krishna Reddy, Male Member)
C.C. No. 73/10
1. This complaint is filed by the complainant under section 11 and 12 of C. P. Act, 1986 seeking a direction on opposite parties to pay:-
(a) The assured amount with interest @ 24% p.a. from the date of death.
(b) Rs. 25,000/- towards compensation for causing mental agony and hardship.
(c) The cost of the complaint
2. Briefly the complainant case is that complainant’s wife late R.Chandra Bhaga Bai was working as Head Mistress of Primary School, Timmam Doddi Village in C.Belegal Mandal. She took PLI policy on 12-07-2008 from opposite party No.1 by paying a sum of Rs.955/- as first premium. The receipt bearing No.31, dated 12-07-2008 was issued by opposite party No.1 accepting the proposal. The policy type is E.A., sum assured is Rs.1,00,000/- and policy No. is AP-308999-CS. Opposite party No.1 sent a letter along with a passbook stating that the policy has come in to effect from 12-07-2008. Thereafter the complainant’s wife died in a road accident on 19-07-2008. The police of C.Belegal Registered a case under section 337, 304 (A) of IPC in crime No.36of 2008 dated 19-07-2008. The complainant being the nominee of the policy, submitted the claim form along with relevant documents to opposite party No.1 and met opposite party No.1 number of times, for the settlement the claim. As he received no response, a legal notice dated 23-12-2009 was issued to opposite party No.1. In response, the opposite party No.3 vide letter dated 06-01-2010 intimated to the complainant, rejected the claim on flimsy grounds. Another notice dated 08-02-2010 was sent to opposite party giving further clarifications. But no reply was given by opposite party though he received it. Aggrieved by the attitude of opposite party, the complainant filed this case before the Forum, claiming compensation under different heads.
3. The complainant filed his sworn affidavit and documents marked as Ex.A1 to A9 in support of his case.
4. In pursuance of the notice of this Forum opposite party No.1 filed his written version denying his liability to the complainant’s claim. The opposite party No.1 admits, the submission of proposal for PLI policy for an assured sum of Rs.1,00,000/- on 11-07-2008 by complainant’s wife, sudden death of assured on 19-07-2008 in a road accident, submission of claim before opposite party by the complainant’s husband, who is the nominee of the policy, but refuses to admit that the opposite party accepted the proposal, the policy come into effect from 12-07-2008, accordingly issued pass book and letter mentioning the policy came into effect from 12-07-2008. The opposite party alleged that the complainant concealed some facts such as the complainant’s wife submitted a proposal for PLI policy for a sum assured of Rs.1,00,000/- on 11-07-2008 by paying Rs.955/- vide receipt No.119/31 dated 12-07-2008 towards advance premium. Actually the opposite party received the proposal on 28-07-2008 and the same was accepted on 28-07-2008 with effect from the date of submission i.e. 12-07-2008. In the mean time the person who submitted the proposal unfortunately died on 19-07-2008. The complainant who is the husband of the deceased not disclosing his wife’s death approached the opposite party on 04-09-2008 received the premium receipt book. There after the opposite party dispatched the policy document to the assured through R.P.No.1363 dated 17-11-2008, which was returned by the postman with remarks “Addressee Expired”. The opposite party submits that as per clause 15 of POIF rules, a LIP contract would be held to commence from the date borne by the policy or written document in which the contract is recorded and the policy would be given to the person assured for custody. In the present case, LIP did not commence at all, since the policy document containing terms and conditions of contract was not delivered to the insured during her life time. The opposite party further avers that opposite party No.3 rejected the claim on flimsy grounds through his letter dated 06-01-2010 is false. Opposite party also submits that after due enquiry and knowing fully the information given by the complainant is false, the claim is rejected. The complainant is guilty of suppression of material facts before opposite parties, while submitting the claim and also before the forum while filing the present case. In light of the above submissions, opposite party prayed to dismiss the complaint with exemplary cost as there are no valid grounds.
5. Opposite party No.2 remained exparte and opposite party No.3 filed a memo adopting the written version of opposite party No.1.
6. Opposite party No.1 filed his sworn affidavit and documents marked as Ex.B1 to B3 to substantiate his case.
7. The complainant and opposite party filed their Written Argument and submitted their oral arguments. Hence the points for consideration are:
- Whether there the complainant made out any case to prove the deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Parties?
- Whether the complainant is entitled for compensation?
(c) If yes, what is the quantum of compensation that can be paid?
8. POINT No.1 & 2:- Ex.A1, the receipt for acceptance of advance deposit from the proponent for taking E.A policy for Rs.1,00,000/-. Ex.A2, the first page of pass book containing details of policy No.AP308999-CS, date of proposal 12 July 2008, date of acceptance, 12 July 2008, first premium Rs.955/- paid on 12 July 2008. Ex.A3/B1 letter dated 20 August, 2008 from Superintendent of Post Offices Kurnool Division Kurnool informing the insured about policy dated 12 July 2008 was accepted on 12 July 2008 and risk of the insured life was under written w.e.f. 12 July, 2008. Ex.A5 letter of opposite party No.1 asking the complainant to submit pass book of the policy No.AP308999-CS Ex.A6 and A7 are the legal notices to opposite parties demanding the settlement of the claim. Ex.A8 the letter of opposite party rejecting the claim of the complainant. Ex.B3 is copy of clause rule 15 of POIF rules. Facts which are not disputed are that the proponent paids Rs.955/- as advance despite for taking Ex.A policy for Rs.1,00,000/- on 12 July, 2008 to opposite party No.1 and died on 19th July, 2008 in road accident. The contention of the complainant is that as per Ex.A2 and A3/B1, since the date of acceptance of premium policy is 12 July, 2008 and the risk of insured life was covered retrospectively from 12 July 2008 he is entitled for policy benefits. The contention of opposite parties is that as per clause 15 of POIF rules of Ex.B3 the contract of insurance is not concluded since the insured died (Ex.A4) before the delivery of the acceptance letter to the insured (Ex.B1). To support the claim the complainant relied on F.A No.120/2008 in CC.No.40/2007 and II (2007) CPJ 143 (Gujarath). As in the F.A 120/2008 in this case also, the opposite party consciously fixed the date of acceptance in its letter marked as Ex.A3 covering the risk of insured life retrospectively from 12 July 2008. If the opposite party has power as in clause 15 of POIF rules which is marked as Ex.B3, he never intended to give his acceptance with retrospective effect as he actually did as per Ex.A3. Therefore it is not necessary for the insured to give his acceptance to Ex.A3. From what is started above the Forum holds that there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite party in dealing the issue and the complainant is entitled to receive the benefits of policy.
10. Point No.3:- The complainant claimed the assured amount of Rs.1,00,000/- with 24% P.A. interest, Rs.25,000/- compensation for mental agony and cost of the case. The claim is excessive. The assured amount of Rs.1,00,000/- with 9% P.A. interest is allowed. As interest is awarded, no compensation for mental agony is granted.
11. In the result, the complaint is allowed directing the opposite parties to pay the assured amount of Rs.1,00,000/- with 9% P.A. interest from the date of repudiation of claim, till the date of realization together the cost of case of Rs.1,000/-. Time for compliance is four weeks from the date of receipt this order.
Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open bench on this the 22nd day of March, 2011.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MALE MEMBER PRESIDENT LADY MEMBER
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainants : Nil For the opposite parties : Nill
List of exhibits marked for the complainants:-
Ex.A1 Photo copy of Postal life insurance receipt NO.31
dated 12-07-2008.
Ex.A2. Photo copy of Pass book showing the acceptance of proposal.
Ex.A3 Letter of Superintendent of post office, Kurnool Division, Kurnool, dated 20-08-2008.
Ex.A4 Photo copy of F.I.R No.36/2008 in C.Belagal P.S.
dated 19-07-2008.
Ex.A5 Office copy of letter dated 04-12-2008.
Ex.A6 Office copy of legal notice dated 23-12-2009 along with postal receipt and acknowledgement.
Ex.A7 Office copy of legal notice dated 08-02-2010
along with acknowledgements.
Ex.A8 Reply of opposite party No.3 dated 06-01-2010.
Ex.A9 Reply of opposite party No.3 dated 22-02-2010.
List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties:-
Ex.B1 Photo copy of the Acceptance of the proposal
dated 20-08-2008.
Ex.B2 Photo copy of the Postal Life Insurance cover returned.
Ex.B3 Photo copy of the conditions of rule 15 of the POIF Rules.
Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-
MALE MEMBER PRESIDENT LADY MEMBER
// Certified free copy communicated under Rule 4 (10) of the
A.P.S.C.D.R.C. Rules, 1987//
Copy to:-
Complainant and Opposite parties :
Copy was made ready on :
Copy was dispatched on :
