By. Smt. Beena. M, Member:-
This is a complaint filed under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019.
2. Brief facts of the case are given below:-
On 01.04.1993 the Complainant entered into the Kerala Police Service. After entered into the service, While, he was working in KAP 4 Battalion, joined in the State Life Insurance (SLI) scheme on 29.04.1994 bearing No.KSID/LI/609560750, which was come into force on May 1994. At the time of joining the policy the Complainant entrusted the consent letter to authorities to deduct Rs.30/- each from the salary to pay the premium to the SLI. As such, the 3rd and 4th Opposite Parties had told that it had been deducted Rs.30 every month from the salary and the same was transferred to the State Life Insurance scheme. Subsequently, on 10.04.1995, the Complainant transferred from KAP to AR Camp Kalpetta, and retired from service on 30.04.2022. Thereafter, an intimation was received dated 05.04.2022 from the First Opposite Party intimating that his claim was settled. In the intimation so received, it was shown that the premium amount payable to the scheme was in arrears for 12 months and so he could not receive even Rs.10,440/- which the Complainant paid into the scheme. The first Opposite Party sanctioned only Rs.9,450/-. According to the Complainant, Rs.29,500/- is the actual amount, the Opposite Party has to pay. It happened only due to the failure of the third and fourth Opposite Parties to collect and pay the amount from the Complainant's salary. The First and Second Opposite Parties have not duly intimated this matter to the Complainant. If they had informed about the arrears of premium, he could make payment through Third and Fourth Opposite Parties. The act of First and Second Opposite Party is deficiency in service. Hence, the Complainant prayed for directing the Opposite Parties to pay an amount of Rs.20,050/- as the balance claim amount and compensation of Rs.50,000/- and Rs.10,000/- towards the cost of the Complaint.
3. After the admission of the Complaint, the Commission issued summons to the Opposite Parties. All the Opposite Parties appeared but they filed version after statutory period of 45 days, hence, set them ex-parte.
4. The Complainant had adduced oral evidence. He was examined as PW1 and the documents were marked as Ext.A1 to A3. Ext.A1 is the Copy of policy, Ext.A2 is the copy of letter sent by the Opposite Party No.2 to the Accounts Officer, District Police Office, Kozhikode City stating that 12 instalments of premium were not seen paid, which shows that there were arrears of 12 instalments of premium. It was the responsibility of the Complainant to check whether the premium was deducted from his salary. Here, there has been negligence on the part of the Complainant too. Here, the policy holder did not make any attempt to get the policy revived, although he continued to receive his full salary and was fully aware that premium was not being deducted from his salary. So, the Complainant is failed to prove his case. Hence the Complaint is liable to be dismissed.
In the result the complaint is dismissed without cost.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Commission on this the 26th day of July 2023.
Date of Filing:- 09.01.2023.
PRESIDENT :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
APPENDIX.
Witness for the Complainant:-
PW1. Shijan. Retired SI.
Witness for the Opposite Parties:-
Nil.
Exhibits for the Complainant:
A1. Copy of State Life Insurance Policy. No.KSDI LI 60950750.
A2. Letter. Dt:05.04.2022.
A3. Copy of Discharge of SLI Policy.
Exhibits for the Opposite Parties:-
Nil.
PRESIDENT :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
MEMBER :Sd/-
/True Copy/
Sd/-
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
CDRC, WAYANAD.
Kv/-
