Punjab

Sangrur

CC/364/2015

Rajwinder Kaur - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Sangrur Central Co-op.Bank Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Shri S.S. Sidhu

31 Mar 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR.

                                             

                                                Complaint No.  364

                                                Instituted on:    01.06.2015

                                                Decided on:       31.03.2016

 

Rajwinder Kaur aged 43 years wife of Late Jaswinder Singh son of Pritam Singh, resident of village Bimber, Tehsil and District Sangrur.

                                                        …Complainant

                                Versus

 

1.             The Central Cooperative Bank Limited Sangrur through its Manager.

2.             The Sangrur Central Cooperative Bank Branch Bhawanigarh, through its Branch Manager.

3.             The Majhi CASS Limited, Majhi, PO Majhi, Sub Tehsil Bhawanigarh, District Sangrur through its Secretary.

4.             Liberty Videocon General Insurance Company Limited, Office No.901 and 902, 9^th Floor, JMD Regent Square, MG Road, Gurgaon, 122002, Haryana.

                                                        ..Opposite parties.

 

For the complainant  :       Shri G.S.Sandhu, Adv.

For OPs No.1 and 2   :       Shri Vineet Duggal, Adv.

For OP No.3             :       Shri GS Shergill, Adv.

For OP No.4             :       Shri Bhushan Garg, Adv.

 

Quorum:   Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

                Sarita Garg, Member

 

Order by : Sukhpal Singh Gill, President.

 

1.             Shri Jaswinder Singh, complainant (referred to as complainant in short) has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that the husband of the complainant namely Jaswinder Singh was a permanent member of  OP number 3 and was maintaining a cooperative Kissan Credit Card vide card number 321 and account number 497. It is further stated that as per the rules in the event of death of any member of the society, the LRs of the deceased were entitled to get claim of Rs.50,000/-.  It is further averred that Jaswinder Singh had deposited Rs.1600/- in account number 1775 L/F No.11/218 in his saving account, as per which in the event of accidental death of the insured farmer, the legal heirs were entitled to get an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- as insurance claim and the complainant was the nominee under the policy.

 

2.             It is further averred in the complaint that Jaswinder Singh met with an accident on 12.4.2014 while coming from Gulwati to Nabha on his motorcycle at about 4.45 AM of which. the case was registered at PS Sadar Nabha.  It has been further stated that after performing the last rites of Jaswinder Singh, the complainant being the nominee approached the Ops for payment of the said claims and also submitted the documents to the Ops, but the Ops did not pay the claim.  Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, the complainant has prayed that the Ops be directed to pay the insurance claim of Rs.2,00,000/- along with interest @ 18% per annum and further claimed compensation and litigation expenses.

 

3.             In reply filed by OP number 1 and 2, preliminary objections are taken up on the grounds that the complainant has unnecessarily dragged the Ops into uncalled litigation and that the complainant has no cause of action and locus standi to file the present complaint. On merits, it is denied that the Ops are liable to pay the insurance claim.  Moreover, the complainant never approached the Op for any claim. However, any deficiency in service on the part of the Op has been denied.

 

4.             In reply filed by Op number 3, preliminary objections are taken up on the grounds that the complainant has unnecessarily dragged the Ops into uncalled litigation and that the complainant has no cause of action and locus standi to file the present complaint. On merits, it is stated that the OP number 3 has no concern with the release of the claim amount and if there is any liability, then the same is of insurance company.  Any deficiency in service on the part of the Op number 3 has been denied.

 

5.             In reply filed by Op number 4, legal objections are taken up on the grounds that no claim was ever lodged by the complainant with the OP and no documents were supplied by the complainant, as such no claim is payable.  However, it is admitted that the Sangrur Central Cooperative Bank Limited had obtained insurance policy bearing number 4112-200201-13-5000006-00-000 for the period from 1.6.2013 to 31.5.2014 covering its saving bank account holders and policy number 4112-200501-13-5000002-00-000 valid for the period from 29.09.2013 to 28.09.2014 covering KCC Accounts holders for OP number 4 which is a group personal accident policy.  It is stated that since no claim has been lodged by the complainant with the Ops, as such, no claim is payable.  On merits, it is stated that the complainant is not entitled to get any claim as no claim was ever lodged with the Op number 4.  Any deficiency in service on the part of the Op number 4 has been denied.

 

6.             The learned counsel for the complainant has produced Ex.C-1 affidavit, Ex.C-2 copy of death certificate, Ex.C-3 copy of DDR, Ex.C-4 copy of PMR, Ex.C-5 copy of bank account, Ex.C-6 copy of passbook of CASS Majhi, Ex.C-7 copy of legal notice, Ex.C-8 to Ex.C-10 copies of postal receipts, Ex.C-11 copy of DL and closed evidence. On the other hand, the learned counsel for OP number 1 and 2 have produced Ex.OP1&2/1 copy of policy, Ex.OP1&2/2 affidavit and closed evidence.  The learned counsel for OP number 3  has produced Ex.Op3/1 affidavit and Ex.OP3/2 authority letter and closed evidence. The learned counsel for OP number 4 has produced Ex.OP4/1 affidavit, Ex.OP4/2 copy of policy, Ex.OP4/3 copy of terms and conditions, Ex.Op4/4 copy of policy, Ex.OP4/5 copy of terms and conditions and closed evidence.

7.             We have carefully perused the complaint, version of the opposite parties and evidence produced on the file and also heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties. In our opinion, the complaint merits part acceptance, for these reasons.

 

8.             After carefully perusal of the complaint, reply and evidence produced on record, we find that the husband of the complainant, namely, Jaswinder Singh was having a Kissan Credit card number 321 and account number 497 and was also having an account number 1775 L/F no. 11/218 under Cooperative Bank Beema Yojna with OP number 2. The complainant has alleged that Jaswinder Singh died on 12.4.2014 in an accident while he was coming from Gulwati to Nabha, of which report number 40 dated 12.4.2014 was recorded at PS Sadar Nabha, a copy of which on record is Ex.C-3.  The complainant has alleged that though he lodged the claim with the Ops, but the Ops did not pay the insurance claim to the complainant/nominee of Jaswinder Singh.

 

9.             On the other hand, the stand of all the Ops is that the complainant/nominee never lodged the claim with the Ops at any time.  Further the complainant has not produced any documentary evidence to show that how she intimated the OPs about the death of Jaswinder Singh and what was the mode of intimation. In para number 6 of the complaint, the complainant has mentioned only "that she approached the Ops and requested for payment of above said claims and also submitted the required documents, but no payment has been made so far".  It is worth mentioning here that if the complainant had lodged the claim with the Ops, then they must have issued the claim number, as in now a days, whole of the system is computerised, as the claim number is even generated by the online system of the insurance company.  Further Ex.OP1&2/ is the affidavit of one Bharpur Singh of the Central Co-operative Bank Limited, Branch Bhawanigarh, wherein it has been clearly stated that the complainant never lodged any claim with the OPs. The same is the position in the affidavit of Yadwinder Singh, Secretary of the Majhi CASS Limited, wherein it has been stated that the complainant never approached the Op number 3 for claim.  In the affidavit Ex.OP4/1, Shri Jitendra Jain, Chief Litigation Manager of OP number 4 has clearly stated that no claim was ever lodged by the complainant with opposite party number 4 and no document was ever submitted by the complainant with the OP number 4.  Under the circumstances, we find that the complainant had not lodged the claim with the insurance company, as such, the question of any deficiency in service on the part of the OP number 4 in not settling the claim does not arise at all.  Further, we feel that ends of justice would be met if the complainant is directed to lodge the claim with the Op number 4 and to submit the documents for settlement of the claim.  In the similar case titled as Darshan Kaur versus MD India Healthcare Services (TPA) Private Limited and others, First Appeal No.77 of 2014, decided on 15.2.2016 by the Hon'ble Punjab State Commission, the complainant was directed to lodge the claim with the Ops within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order and thereafter Ops will decide the claim within a period of two months according to the terms and conditions of the policy.

 

10.           In view of our above discussion, we allow the complaint partly and direct the complainant to lodge the claim with OP number 4 within a period of thirty days of receipt of copy of this order and submit all the documents with the OP number 4 and thereafter OP number 4 shall settle the claim within a period of two months of submission of the claim by the complainant with OP number 4 and further OP number 4 shall intimate its decision by registered post to the complainant.  With these observations, the complaint is disposed of accordingly.  A copy of this order be issued to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to records.

                Pronounced.

                March 31, 2016.

                                                        (Sukhpal Singh Gill)

                                                                President

 

                                                                (Sarita Garg)

                                                                    Member