C. F. CASE NO.-CC/01/2009.



PETITIONER =Vs. = O.Ps

Maharani Das, W/o Notan Das, 1) Rep. by Supdt. of Post Office,

Vill. Kalikapur, P.O. Brahamandihi, Suri Head Office, P.O. & P.S. Suri,

P.S. Nanoor, Dist. Birbhum. Dist. Birbhum.

2) Post Master General, Yogayag Bhavan,

C.R. Avenue, Kolkata – 700 012.

3) Post Master, Brahamandihi, P.S. Nanoor,

Dist. Birbhum.



PRESENT :-Shri Sibsankar Pal ----------- President.

:- Miss. Bula Koley--------------Member

:- Sri Soumen Sikder-----------Member





J U D G E M E N T

Factual matrix leading to complainant’s case U/s 12 of the C.P. Act, in brief, is that the complainant’s son Basudev Das (since deceased) opened Postal Life Insurance Policy, with Brahmandihi Post Office in the District of Birbhum (O.P No.3) on 12.01.2004 for Rs. 25,000/- at a monthly premium of Rs. 118/- under policy No. R-WB-CA-DA-457-32 dtd. 31.03.2004. The petitioner is the nominee of the said Postal Life Insurance. Premium was duly paid to O.P no.3. After first deposit of premium the Insured Basudev Das died on 14.05.2004. The Petitioner, subsequently, had been to O.P no.3 for settlement of claim for several occasions, when O.P no.3 repeatedly told her that the matter was under active consideration of the Head Post Office (O.P No.1). On failure of the O.Ps to settle the claim amount, accordingly on 12.09.2008, lawyer’s notice was sent to O.P No.s 1 & 2 demanding settlement of claim amount. Inspite of receiving the notice, the O.Ps did not pay any heed. Hence, this case.

O.Ps have been contesting the case by filing written version, wherein all the material allegations contained in the petition have been denied. Positive case of the O.Ps is that the claim papers have been submitted to the Dy. Divisional Manager(PLI), O/o the Chief Post Master General, W.B. Circle, Kol.-12 under No. LIN/RPLI/Pt.1 dtd. 16.09.2004. It is still under enquiry for clarification on certain points, as raised by Circle Office, and the claim would be settled as per POIE Rules. The petitioner is not entitled to get any relief as prayed for. With all this, the O.Ps have prayed for dismissal of the case.

Upon the pleadings of the parties, following points emerge for consideration.

P O I N T S

1) Is there any deficiency of service on the part of the O.Ps in the matter of settlement of PLI claims?

2) Whether the petitioner is entitled to get any order of payment and compensation as prayed for?

3) To what other reliefs, if any, the petitioner is entitled to get?



Decision with reasons



Point Nos. 1,2&3:- All the points being interlinked character are taken up together for the sake of brevity and for convenience of consideration.

Contd../2

-:: 2 ::-



Admittedly, Basudev Das, (Since Deceased) opened a Postal Life Insurance Policy, being insured value of Rs. 25,000/- with monthly premium of Rs. 118/- with the O.Ps and after depositing one premium, Basudev Das died on 14.05.2004, which get effective support from the written version submitted by the O.Ps, as well as from the premium receipt and death certificate, produced by the complainant, who happens to be the nominee of the deceased. From the lawyer’s letters dated 09.09.2008 and 12.09.2008 and also from the evidence of the complainant, it has been amply proved that after the death of Basudev Das, the complainant approached the O.Ps for settlement of PLI dues, on several occasions. One Subal Chandra Adhikari has examined himself on behalf of the O.Ps by submitting evidence in chief, supported by affidavit from where it is very much clear that the death claim is still under enquiry for clarification on certain points. Actually, what are the points to be clarified, are not disclosed anywhere. We are very much astonished to note that even after the death of the insured in the middle of year 2004, and despite the approach of the complainant before the O.Ps, for about 5 years, the O.Ps have been slumbering over the entire aspect with giving any due importance to the legitimate aspirations of the unfortunate petitioner who lost his son. Such non-action on the part of the O.Ps is the naked illustration of deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.

Needless to mention that insurance is the outcome of contract between the parties, the result of which must be obeyed by the parties on the happening of any contingency.

The petitioner is, therefore, in our view, entitled to get the entire insured amount of Rs. 25,000/- together with its vested bonus and / or accrued interest, if any, from the O.Ps.

In the given facts and circumstances of the case, we are, however, not inclined to pass any order of compensation in favour of the petitioner as prayed for.

Before we part with the judgement, we would like to note that the conduct of the O.Ps constrained the petitioner to rush to the Forum, for seeking redressal, after incurring expenditure, and for this reason, we feel that the O.Ps must pay consolidated cost of Rs. 500/- to the petitioner.

All the points are thus disposed of.

In the result, the case succeeds.

Hence,

Ordered

that C.F. Case N. CC/01/O/2009 be and the same is hereby allowed on contest against the O.Ps with consolidated cost of Rs. 500/-(rupees five hundred only).

The petitioner do get an order of award of Rs. 25,000/- (rupees twenty five thousand only) together with its vested bonus and / or accrued interest, if any, against the O.Ps.

O.Ps No.s 1, 2 & 3 jointly and severally are directed to pay the above awarded amount of Rs. 25,000/- and other benefits and cost of Rs. 500/- as ordered above within 6(six) weeks from the date of this order, failing which, an interest @ 8% P.A. will be charged upon the awarded amount of Rs. 25,000/-.

In the event of non-payment of the above amount within the prescribed period, the petitioner is at liberty to take recourse to law.

Copies be supplied to the parties free of cost.