ORDER BY HON’BLE PRESIDENT- MR. P.K. PADHI:

                                                                                             JUDGMENT

            Complainant has filed this consumer complaint U/s.35 of C.P. Act, 2019 seeking following reliefs;

            “Direct the opposite parties to reconsider the claim of the complainant by paying the personal accident benefit in terms of the policy amounting to Rs.6,00,000/- with 12% interest and Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for mental agony and rs.10,000/- towards cost of litigation”.

            The brief fact of the case is that, the father of the complainant has availed housing loan from the opposite party No.2 for construction of house situated at his village nearby Jagatsinghpur. The total loan availed Rs.12,00,000/- in the year 2016. At the time of availing of the loan the opposite party No.2 persuaded the complainant to go for an insurance policy for insuring the house as well as a personal accident cover covering the borrower. The opposite party No.1 insured the complainant and his father under “Unihome Care Insurance Policy” commences from 06.12.2016 to 05.12.2039 covering the risk of building as per section I and covering the personal accident cover death in section II. The sum assured under the policy so far as building is concern is Rs.12,00,000/- and Rs.6,00,000/- so far as personal accident covers. The matter stood thus while the said policy was subsisting the father of the complainant who is the co-borrower and insured died due to heart-attack on 30.11.2017 in S.C.B. Medical College and Hospital. The complainant intimated the fact to the opposite parties on 18.12.2017. Further after duly intimation about the death of father the complainant has also applied for death certificate on 18.12.2017 and the death certificate was issued on 17.01.2018.  After intimation to the opposite parties the complainant requested the opposite party No.1 to pay the accident cover amounting to Rs.6,00,000/-. But the opposite party No.2 after receipt of the aforesaid letter dt.27.12.2019 intimated the complainant vide their letter dtd.16.01.2020 that the opposite party No.1 has already rejected the claim.

            Notice to opposite parties were sent by Regd. Post on 26.9.2022 but opposite party No.1 did not appear and opposite party No.2 though appeared did not file any written version and remained absent for which the opposite parties were set ex-parte on 31.01.2023.

            Heard counsel for complainant and perused the records. Facts of the case are mostly not disputed. The complainant has taken a loan jointly along with his late father and both were insured for which premium has been paid by opposite party No.2 to opposite party No.1 but the case has been repudiated on the ground that “We thankfully acknowledge the receipt of your letter No.BOB/KTP/089/2019-20 dtd.21.12.2019 and noted the contents therein. Basing on the material facts and figures provided by you enclosed with the said letter it is observed that the death of Bijaya Ketan Mishra has occurred on 30.11.2017 which is well beyond 24 months before the date of intimation received by us on 27.12.2019.”

            The complainant has filed statement of account from which it is revealed that opposite parties have taken premium of Rs.7,194/- on 06.12.2016 and on 19.6.2018 Rs.49,000/- was adjusted due to death of Mr. Bijaya Ketan Mishra and adjusted against Rashmi Ranjan Mishra i.e. son and complainant. From the statement of account of opposite party No.2 it is revealed that it is within the knowledge of opposite party No.2 who is acting as agent of opposite party No.1 and paying premium to opposite party No.1 but while settling the claim instead of protecting the interest of consumer who has paid premium protecting the interest of insurance. We are satisfied that complainant has intimated regarding the death of his father i.e. co-borrower to the opposite parties at least before 19.6.2018 which reveals from the statement of account.

            We therefore direct the opposite parties to settle the death claim and deduct the share of dead person i.e. Bijay Katen Mishra and it is in between opposite parties No.1 & 2 to settle the claim. The opposite party No.2 shall deduct the loan amount from the principal as if the insured amount i.e. Rs.6,00,000/- has been paid to bank and calculate the loan after deducting the share of complainant’s father. The date of deduction of insured amount is fixed as 19.6.2018 as it is clear that the death of complainant’s father was within the knowledge of opposite parties at least not later than 19.6.2018 as such the opposite party No.2 shall not claim any interest on the loan for the share of complainant’s father. We also impose cost of Rs.20,000/- for harassment and unfair trade practice and cost of Rs.5,000/- towards cost of litigation to be paid by opposite parties No.1 & 2 who are jointly and severally liable. With the aforesaid observation and direction the consumer complaint is dispose of.