Andhra Pradesh

Nellore

CC/72/2014

Smt.Boorsu Jyothi 27 years Wife - Complainant(s)

Versus

1.The manager Life insurance Corporation of India. - Opp.Party(s)

C.P.Suresh

30 Sep 2015

ORDER

Date of Filing     :10-09-2014

                                                                                                Date of Disposal:30-09-2015

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM:NELLORE

Wednesday, this the 30^th day of   September, 2015

 

PRESENT: Sri M. Subbarayudu Naidu, B.Com.,B.L.,LL.M.,President(FAC) & Member                            

                   Sri N.S. Kumara Swamy, B.Sc.,LL.B., Member.

 

C.C.No.72/2014

 

1.	Boorsu Jyothi, Aged 27 years, W/o.Late C. Vijayakumar, C/o.C. Ankaiah, 25-1-677, Podalakur Road, Z.P.Colony, 3rd cross, Nellore-524003.
2.	Challa Mahathi, Aged 4 years,Minor, Represented by her mother:  Boorsu Jyothi,                                  ..… Complainants

                                                                           Vs.

 

1.	The Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India, Branch Office, Puttur, Chittoor District, A.P.
2.	The Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India, Divisional Office, Near TTD Kalyanamandapam, Dargamitta, Nellore-524 001.                                                          ..…Opposite parties

                                                              .  

            This complaint coming on 21-09-2015 before us for hearing in the presence of                Sri C.P. Suresh, advocate for the complainant and                                                                                     Sri A.V. Murali Krishna, advocate for the opposite parties  and having stood over for consideration till this day and this Forum made the following:

 

ORDER

 

(ORDER BY  Sri N.S. KUMARA SWAMY, MEMBER)

 

The brief  averments of the complaint are that her husband namely late C. Vijaya Kumar has taken a new bhima gold policy dated 26-11-2013 from the 1^st opposite party for a policy amount of Rs.5,00,000/- by paying premium of Rs.6,606/- under quarterly rests.  According to the policy conditions, if the policy holder died in an accident, the insurer shall have to pay the amount of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lakhs only)  to the nominee of the policy holder.  Accordingly, the complainant paid premiums date 26-11-2013 and 24-02-2014. Unfortunately, the husband of the complainant died  due to road accident near Samudayam Village on the Puttur – Chennai road, Narayanavanam Mandalam, Chittoor, A.P. on 22-07-2014. Eventhough no intimation of next premium  from 1^st opposite party  Her husband paid the premium for the month of May, in the month of June, 2014 which is within the grace period but before the death of  life assured.  The same information was given to the complainant and also the  agent by phone.  The complainant further stated that  on 27-09-2014, she received demand notice  addressed in the name of her husband demanding him  to pay the premium amount which means the policy  was inforce on the date of death of her husband.   After completion of all formalities to  her husband body she made claim application before the 1^st opposite party alongwith original policy and receipts except the premium receipt of  May month which was said to be paid in the month of grace period  of June  because, the said receipt was not tracedout on account of sudden accidental death.  The 1^st opposite party took signatures of the complainant to give policy benefit amount with the signature of agent namely Smt.Radha.  According to agent’s affidavit, it is clearly stated by her that original policy and also deposit form were in the custody of 1^st opposite party and the 1^st opposite party has to produce the same before the Hon’ble Forum.  Further the agent also stated that she noted the premium amounts  in her personal book.  The complainant further stated that  if her husband has not paid the  premium for the month of May, why the development officer  called her to produce relevant statement and records for  releasing of L.I.C.  amounts  that means the policy was inforce  on the date of death. Hence, the complainant prays to direct the opposite parties to pay the amount of Rs.10,000/- alongwith interest at  12% p.a. and costs of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lakhs only).  Hence, the complaint.

 

2.         On the other hand opposite party resisted the complainant averments  made in the complaint  except that admitting that complainant’s husband took bheema gold policy bearing No.845909694 on 26-11-2013 from the 1^st opposite party for a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- with quarterly premium of Rs.6,606/- and also admitted that  the insured died on 22-07-2014.  opposite parties further contended that the insured has to pay  premiums in the month of February, May, August and November  in every year.  Two premiums dated  26-11-2013 and  24-02-2014 were paid except the premium for the month of May was not paid  eventhough grace period  allowed upto 30 days i.e., 13-06-2014.  Further the insured died on 22-07-2014 and during the life time he was not paid the premium for the month of May.   In support of their contention, the policy and history report submitted for perusal of premium credits. Therefore the policy was in lapsed condition as on the date of death of life assured occurred  after grace period.  Further, the premium for the month of May said to have been paid by the assured was suspicious and quite contrary as per paras 4, 5 and 10 of complaint averments.  As such the repudiation is proper and there is no deficiency of service on their part.  Hence, the complaint may be dismissed with costs.

 

            3.         The point for determination would be for consideration is :

 

1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties if so, 

 whether the complainant is entitled for the relief as  prayed for?

2. To what relief?

 

            4.         In order to substantiate  the complainants averments, complainant filed evidence on affidavit  as P.W.1 and marked Exs.A1 to A11.  On the other hand,   the opposite party filed evidence on affidavit as R.W.1 and marked Exs.B1 and B2.

 

            5.         POINT No.1:  It is an admitted fact that the insured namely late C. Vijaya Kumar  has obtained Bhima Gold Policy bearing No.845909694 on 26-11-2013 for a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-  with quarterly premium of Rs.6,606/-.  It is also  admitted fact that  life assured died on  22-07-2014.  The disputed fact in this case is non payment of  premium for the month of May, 2014.  Whether it has been paid in the said month or in grace period i.e., on 13-06-2014 during the life time of  life assured. So, it has to be decided on the disputed point.

 

            6.         The contention of the complainant  that her husband died in an accident on                   22-07-2014 and during his life time, he paid all the premiums regularly without any break but the premium receipt for the month of May, 2014  could not be produced on account of misplaced.  But her husband  informed  the payment of said premium to her and also agent  namely Smt.Radha before accident took place.  She also further contended that the said agent  made a note  on her register which was maintained by her.  Eventhough, the disputed premium paid by her husband on time, his policy was lapsed by the opposite parties  and  repudiated the claim on the ground that  policy was lapsed.  She alleged that the repudiation is unjustified  and she being nominee of her husband is entitled for  Rs.10,00,000/- as per the terms of the policy.  Further, the complainant said to have been stated that  the agent namely Smt.Radha also noted down the payment of premium for the month of May in her book.  But the agent  did not support the version of the complainant in her affidavit.

 

            7.         As seen from the material records, it is disclosed that the complainant did not place any cogent proof of document with regard to misplacement of premium receipt which was  said to have been lost during the time of accident.  Further, the complainant  also did not place the agent’s personal register  to show the bonafide entry of premium for the month of May, 2014, which was said to be maintained by the agent as alleged in the complaint.

 

            8.           In support of the allegations in the complaint, the complainant cited a decision reported in  III (2009) CPJ  25 (NC).  The finding of the said decision by the Hon’ble National commission in para No.4 is reproduced hereunder.

 

            9.         “On being noticed the petitioner entered appearance and filed  written statement.  The defense taken was that the deceased did not remit the quarterly  premium on time. Intermittently there were certain lapses  but  the instalments  were paid  later on with late fee.  As the deceased failed to pay one of the quarterly instalments the policy had elapsed  which was  got  renewed only five months prior to his death.”

 

                        In the said decision, it is an admitted fact that the last premium was paid on                 24-03-2000 and  the insured died on  08-05-2000. 

 

            10.       In the instant case, it is not an admitted fact that the complainant paid the premium. The complainant has not filed  any proof showing that the life assured has paid the premium in dispute.  So, the decision cited by the complainant is not applicable  to the facts of the present case.  The counsel for the complainant also argued that no notice was given by the opposite parties with regard to pending premium for the month of May, 2014 and also about the lapsation  of policy.

 

11.       For contra to the evidence placed by the complainant, the opposite parties  placed plausible evidence by repudiating the claim on the ground that disputed premium for the month of May was not paid  either on the  due date or within the grace period.  An account of  non-payment of premium on the due date or within the grace period, the policy lapsed as per the terms and conditions of the  policy No.2, which was clearly mentioned on the back side of the policy bond, which is Ex.B1.  In such is the case,  it is not binding on the part of opposite parties  to give notice to the policy holders about the lapsation  as the said fact has already enlightened in Ex.B1.  So, it is not mandatory as per the condition No.2 of the policy.  Further, no separate notice is necessary for pending premiums  since the payment of premiums due to be paid has already been intimated in the last premium receipt dated 13-02-2014,which is Ex.A11. The said fact also mentioned in the policy bond.

 

12.       What is required to be shown is that the deceased has not truthfully disclosed the payment of disputed premium and if it is found to be false, the opposite parties could rightly repudiated the claim.  In the instant case as seen from the History Report  of  premiums of the life assured, which is Ex.B2  patently discloses non-payment of disputed premium for the month of May, 2014 except shown  two quarterly premiums i.e., 26-11-2013 and 24-02-2014 paid by the life assured.  The insured  did not take any steps to contact opposite parties with regard to  ascertainment of payment of disputed premium during his life time. 

 

13.       Hence,  it is very clear through the document Ex.B2 that the life assured did not pay the disputed premium either on due date or  within the grace period i.e.,  13-06-2014   during his life time.  The action and steps taken by the opposite parties are in conformity with the terms and conditions of the policy. Hence, we agree with the evidence produced by the opposite parties  is sacrosanct but the complainant  version would clearly  go to show that without paying the disputed premium to the opposite parties by filing this complaint wanted to achieve  her object  under  threat of litigation.  This is nothing but abuse of process of law.  The act of the complainant is illegal,  and is  surely misconceived the Forum. 

 

14.       The present complaint is without any merits and appears to have been filed solely with a view to escape liability  and also to get wrongful gain  at the cost of others.

            15.       The complaint deserves to be  dismissed.  Accordingly point No.1 is answered.

            16.       POINT No.2:  In the result, the complaint is dismissed, but without costs.

 

Typed to the dictation to the Stenographer, corrected and pronounced by us in the open  Forum, this the 30^th day of  September, 2015.

 

 

             Sd/-                                                                                                          Sd/-

           MEMBER                                                                                PRESIDENT(F.A.C.)

 

                                                APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

 

Witnesses Examined for the complainant

 

P.W.1  -

18-05-2015

Smt.Adapala Radha, W/o.Giri, LIC Agent,Chittoor District Proof Affidavit of Radha as witness as per the orders in  I.A.No.56/2015,  dated 04-06-2015.

 

Witnesses Examined for the opposite parties

 

R.W.1  -

21-01-2015

Sri B. Sreenivasulu, S/o.Viswanadham, Working as A.O., in the L.I.C. of India, Divisional Office, Nellore.

 

                             EXHIBITS MARKED FOR THE COMPLAINANT

 

Ex.A1  -	05-12-2013	Photocopy of policy No.845909694, dated 13-11-2013 in favour of C. Vijaya Kumar issued by the opposite party.
Ex.A2  -	-	Photocopy of Renewal Premium Receipt in favour of                  C. Vijaya Kumar for Rs.6,606/- issued by the opposite party due from 02/2014 to 02/2014.
Ex.A3  -	-	Photocopy of First Premium Receipt  in policy number 845909694  in favour of C. Vijaya Kumar issued by the opposite party.
Ex.A4  -	11-08-2014	Photocopy of  Post-Mortem Certificate issued by  A.P.V.V.P.Hospital, Puttur in favour of C. Vijaya Kumar.
Ex.A5  -	20-08-2014	Photocopy of letter from opposite party No.2 to the complainant.
Ex.A6  -	27-08-2014	Letter from  opposite party No.2 to the complainant’s advocate.
Ex.A7  -	22-07-2014	Photocopy of First Information Report  No.56/2014 in Chittoor District.
Ex.A8  -	-	Photocopy of Remand Report  addressed to the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Puttur.
Ex.A9  -	05-08-2014	Photocopy of Death Certificate in favour of C. Vijaya Kumar issued by the Panchayat Secretary, Samudayam (G.P.).
Ex.A10 -	25-08-2014	Legal notice from complainant’s advocate to the opposite parties alongwith two registered post receipts.
Ex.A11-	-	Inland Letter   for  insurance premium amount from opposite party to the C. Vijaya Kumar.

 

                         EXHIBITS MARKED FOR THE OPPOSITE PARTIES

 

Ex.B1  -	05-12-2013	Photocopy of policy No.845909694, dated 13-11-2013 in favour of C. Vijaya Kumar issued by the opposite party.
Ex.B2  -	20-08-2014	Policy transactions details in policy No.845909694 in faovur of  Vijaya issued by opposite party No.2.

 

                                                                                                              

                                                                                                                     Id/-

                                                                                                         PRESIDENT(F.A.C.)

 

Copies to:

 

1.	Sri C.P. Suresh, Advocate, 27-5-42, 19th X Road, Balaji Nagar, Nellore (A.P.)
2.	Sri A.V. Muralikrishna, Advocate, 26/1/400, B.V. Nagar, A.K.Nagar (P.O.), Nellore.

 

Date when free copy was issued: