BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM: KURNOOL
Present: Sri K.V.H.Prasad, B.A., LL.B., Hon’ble President
And
Smt.C.Preethi, Honble Lady Member
Tuesday the 13th day of February, 2007
C.C. No.104/2006
Smt. Kanisetty Lakshmi Devi,W/o. Late Kanisetty Ranga Swamy,
Hindu, aged about 40 years, cooly,R/o.Jaladurgam Village, Peapully (M),
KURNOOL District. …Complainant
-Vs-
1. The Secretary,
Primary Agricultural Co-operative Society. Jaladurgam(v), Peapully (M),
KURNOOL District.
2. The Divisional Manager,
The Oriental Insurance Company,
Bhupal Complex,
KURNOOL.
3. The General Manager,
K.D.C.C. Bank, Opp:Govt. Eye Hospital, Kurnool. …Opposite parties
This complaint coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri. D.Kumara Swamy Advocate, Kurnool for complainant, and Sri. G.Sudhakara Reddy, Advocate, Kurnool for opposite Parties No.1,and 3 and Sri. V.Victor Augustine for opposite party No.2, and stood over for consideration till this day, the Forum made the following:-
ORDER
(As per Smt C. Preethi, Honble Lady Member)
1. This consumer complaint of the complainant is filed U/S 11 and 12 of C.P. Act., seeking a direction on the opposite parties to pay insurance policy amount of Rs.1,00,000/- with 12percent interest per annum from the date of death till realization, Rs.15,000/- towards compensation for mental agony, Rs.3,000/- towards costs and any other relief or reliefs which the complainant is entitled in the circumstances of the case.
2. The brief facts of the complainants case is that the complainants husband K.Ranga Swamy, on 28-11-2000 at about 6.30p.m. noticed the non function of Electric Motor and verified the motor and repaired some minor works. On immediate effect the wires which were connected to the board burned and flames came out and electricity power passed into the body of Ranga swamy and he received electricity shock, as a result he fell down from the pail and sustained severe injury and subsequently, death while shifting to the hospital, an F.I.R. was registered U/S 174 C.R.P.C. in Cr.No.28/00 on 29-11-00. During the life of K.Ranga Swamy he was a member of opposite party No.1 and paid Rs.21/- as premium to opposite party No.2 through opposite party No.1 for “Coverage of Accidental Death Benefit Insurance Policy”. Thereafter, the complainant informed opposite party No.2 through opposite party No.1 by telegram about the death of K.Rangaswamy and submitted required documents along with claim form. Inspite of several approaches and requests opposite party No.2 did not pay the policy amount and postponed the matter without any reasons, being vexed the complainant got issued legal notice dated:27-07-05 through an advocate and opposite party No.2 having received the said notice did neither replied nor settled the claim. Hence, constrained to file this complaint before this forum for redressal.
3. The complainant in substantiation of her case relied on the following documents viz:(1)F.I.R. in Cr.No.28/00 of P.S. Jaladurgam (2)Inquest report in Cr.No.28/00 along with summons served (3)Final report dated:27-12-2007 of S.I. Police, Jaladurgam addressed to Mandal Executive Officer, Peapully (4)Postmortem certificate of K.Ranga Swamy dated:30-11-00 (5)proceedings of Executive Magistrate Peapully dated:28-12-00 (6) proceedings dated:28-12-00 of Sub Divisional Police Officer, Dhone (7) Attested xerox copy of death certificate and (8) Office copy of legal notice dated:27-07-05 addressed to opposite party No.2 along with postal receipt bearing No.1912, besides to the sworn affidavit of the complainant in reiteration of her complaint averments and the above documents are marked as Ex.A1 to A8 for its appreciation in this case. The complainant caused interrogatories to opposite parties No.1, 2 and 3 and suitablely replied to the interrogatories caused by opposite parties No.1, 2 and 3.
4. In pursuance to the notice of this forum as to this case of the complainant, the opposite parties No.1,2 and 3 appeared through their standing counsel and filed separate written versions.
5. The written version of opposite party No.1 submits that the complainant has to strictly prove that on 28-10-00 the deceased K.Ranga swamy died due to electric shock and further submits that it has issued letter dated:19-03-01 to the complainant requesting her to submit certificate from A.P.S.E.B regarding the death of K.Ranga swamy and the said notice was received by the son of the complainant. It further submit that opposite party No.1 is not liable to pay the insurance amount as it had paid annual premium to opposite party No.2 and it is opposite party No.2 who has to pay the policy amount and there is no negligence or delay on part of opposite party No.1 and seeks for dismissal of the complaint with costs.
6. The written version of opposite party No.2 alleges that the complaint is bad and not maintainable either in law or on facts and admits it has issued a Group Personal Accident Policy bearing No.43102/group P.A/10423/2001 and insured are P.A.C.S of D.C.C bank covering borrowers of P.A.C.S. Jaladurgam and the policy commenced from 15-04-02, to 14-04-01 and the risk covered is for Rs.1,00,000/- in case of death due to accident. The death intimation of K.Ranga Swamy was sent along with the claim form to opposite party No.1 and the claim along with important documents such as F.I.R. police panchanama postmortem report, death certificate, certified of government doctor, certificate by village panchayat, medical report, family member certificate and certificate from A.P.S.E.B mentioning the reasons as to the death of deceased should be sent along with claim form to opposite party No.2 for processing the claim. But the opposite party No.1 has obtained the signature of the complainant on the claim form and sent back the claim to opposite party No.2 without any details as to the cause of death of Ranga Swamy. As the complainant did not submit claim form along with required documents the opposite party No.2 waited for some time and closed the claim for want of authoritative certificate from A.P.Transco as to the death due to electrification. As the complainant failed to submit the necessary certificate from competent authority as to the details of death due to electric shock, opposite party No.2 is not at all liable to pay any compensation to the complainant and it is for opposite party No.1 to guide the complainant. It is clear that this case of the complainant is mis- representation and suppression of material facts due to non submission of valid certificate from competent authority of A.P. Transco as to the death of K.Ranga swamy. Hence, the opposite party No.2 closed the claim of the complainant which is perfectly justified and legally valid. In absence of the report of A.P.Transco as to the cause of death and the reasons mentioned by the complainant are not believable, the postmortem report also does not bears testimony to this fact as there are no black marks or burn injuries anywhere on the body of the deceased. Hence, the opposite parties did not settle the claim of the complainant and the complainants made a cook up imaginary story by suppressing material facts in order to make wrongful gain to her self and wrongful loss to opposite parties No.2 and seeks for the dismissal complaint with costs.
7. The written version of opposite party No.3 submits that complainant has to prove that the deceased Ranga Swamy death was due to electric shock and the complainant did not file the complaint along with her children and parents of the deceased, hence the complaint is bad for non joinder of necessary parties and the opposite party No.1 had paid annual premium to opposite party No.2 and opposite party No.2 is liable under the scheme to pay the Accidental benefit under the Accident Death Benefit Insurance Policy and there is no negligence or delay on part of opposite party No.3 and seeks for the dismissal of complaint with costs.
8. In substantiation of their case the opposite parties 1,2, and 3 relied on the following documents viz:(1)Office copy of letter dated:19-03-2001 of opposite party No.1 addressed to complainant(2)Acknowledgement by K.Ravi Sankar as to the receipt of Ex.B1(3)office copy of letter dated:16-03-2001 addressed by opposite party No.2 to the opposite party No.1(4)claim form No.1433 submitted by complainant to opposite party No.2(5)attested Xerox of Group Personal Accident Policy(6)Attested Xerox of memorandum dated:13-06-2000(7)Attested xerox copy of memorandum dated:11-10-2000 and (8)Attested xerox copy of memorandum of Agreement dated:24-04-2000 between oriental Insurance company and A.P.Transco co-operative banks association, besides to the sworn affidavit of opposite parties 1,2, and 3 in reiteration of their written version averments. The opposite parties 1,2,and 3 caused interrogatories to the complainant and suitablely replied to the interrogatories caused by the complainant.
9. Hence, the point for consideration is to what relief the complainant is entitled alleging deficiency of service:?
10. It is a the case of the complainant that her husband while repairing electric motor, due to sudden connection of electric wires electricity passed through the body of her husband and resulted in the death of her husband due to injuries from the fall from pial on 28-11-00. The complainant further submits that her husband was covered under the policy issued by opposite party No.2 vide Ex.B5 and hence she is entitled to accidental benefit under the said policy and relied on Ex.A1 to A8. But on the otherside the opposite party No.2 submits that as there was no substantial proof as to the death of K.Ranga Swamy due to electric shock it requested opposite party No.1 vide Ex.B3 letter dated:16-03-01 addressed by opposite party No.2 to opposite party No.1 requesting opposite party No.1 to sent report of A.P.Transco as to the reasons of death of Ranga Swamy. The opposite party No.1 in turn vide Ex.B1 requested the complainant to send the certificate of A.P.Transco before to 24-03-01 and the said letter was received by complainants son who acknowledged the same vide Ex.B2. The counsel for opposite party No.2 strongly argued that there was no response from the complainants side after receiving Ex.B1 dated:19-03-01 till issual legal notice vide Ex.B8 dated:27-07-05 and as the complainant did not submit necessary certificate from A.P.Transco it could not settle the claim in favour of the complainant.
11. From the above discussion it is clear that the deceased K.Ranga Swamy died on 28-01-00 and the requirement letter of opposite party No.2 was sent to the complainant was received by the complainant by 19-03-01 and the said requirement was not complied by the complainant and thereafter issued legal notice dated:27-07-05 vide Ex.A8, stating that all required documents are submitted along with claim form vide Ex.B4 and requested to settle the claim. By itself it remains clear that legal notice of the complainant for insurance claim of Rs.1,00,000/- is given by her counsel at a highly belated stage and beyond the prescribed period of limitation from the cause of action which has aroused on 22-11-00 and 19-03-01. Under the provisions of C.P.Act., the limitation prescribed is two years to the date of cause of action and as this case is filed beyond the said prescribed period of limitation and not even condonation for delay was sought and permitted at the time of institution of this case. Hence, the case of the complainant is hopelessly barred by limitation.
12. The counsel for complainant argued that the cause of action for the complainant aroused from the date of issual of legal notice dated:27-07-05, but as per the decision Honble State Consumers Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi in M/s. Manorama Vij V/s Swatantra Land and Finance Private Limited report in II-2003 C.P.J. page No.558, it was held that any unsubstantiated oral representation or visiting the office of the opposite parties or causing legal notices after the period of limitation could not save the limitation. In this case legal notice vide Ex.A8 was issued after the period of limitation allowed i.e., two years. Hence, the complainant is not remaining entitled to any of the reliefs claimed in the complaint.
13. Consequently, there being any merit and force in the claim and contentions of the complainant, the complaint is dismissed.
Dictated to the Stenographer transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced in the Open bench on this the 13th day of February, 2007.
MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant: Nil For the opposite parties :Nil
List of Exhibits marked for the complainant:-
Ex.A1 First Information Report (F.I.R.) in Cr.No.28/2000 of P.S.
Jaladurgam.(No.in 2 pages).
Ex.A2 Inquest Report in Cr.No.28/00 along with the summons served. (No.in 5
pages).
Ex.A3 Final Report, dated:27-12-2000, S.I. of police Jaladurgam addressed to
Mandal Executive Magistrate, Peapully.
Ex.A4 Post Mortem Certificate of Kanisetty Ranga Swamy Dated:30-11-2000.
Ex.A5 proceedings, dated:28-12-2000 of Executive Magistrate, Peapully.
Ex.A6 Proceedings, dated:21-12-2000 of Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Dhone.
Ex.A7 Attested Xerox copy of Death Certificate.
Ex.A8 officer copy of legal notice, dated:27-07-2005 addressed to opposite party
No.2 along with postal receipt No.1912.
List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties:-
Ex.B1 office copy of letter, dated:19-03-2001 of opposite party No.1 addressed to
complainant.
Ex.B2 Acknowledgement by K.Ravi Sankar as to Ex.B1.
Ex.B3 office copy of letter dated:16-03-2001 addressed by opposite party No.2 to
opposite party No.1.
Ex.B4 claim form No.1433 submitted by complainant to opposite party No.2.
Ex.B5 Attested Xerox copy of Group personal Accident policy (No.in 2 pages).
Ex.B6 Attested Xerox copy of Memorandum dated:13-06-2000.
Ex.B7 Attested Xerox copy of Memorandum dated:11-10-2000.
Ex.B8 Attested Xerox copy of dated:24-04-2000 between Oriental Insurance
company & A.P. Co-operative Banks Association. (No.in 3 pages).
MEMBER PRESIDENT
Copy to:-
1. Sri. D.Kumara Swamy, Advocate, Kurnool.
2. Sri. G.Sudhakara Reddy, Advocate, Kurnool.
3. Sri. V.Victor Augustine, Advocate, Kurnool.
Copy was made ready on:
Copy was dispatched on:
Copy was delivered to parties:
