:    FINAL ORDER    :

DATE OF FILING :  06.09.2016

ORDER No.     16       

DATE. 11.05.2017

Shri Asoke Kumar Das - President

Petitioner’s case in a nutshell is that Tapas Ghosh, since deceased purchased one LIC policy (Jeevan Saral) No. 428960276 from OP No. 1, LICI, Krishnagar Branch.  Sri Tapas Ghosh died on 27.02.2013 in a road accident.  The present petitioners being father and mother of Tapas Ghosh have filed this case claiming Rs. 1,33,968/- towards maturity sum assured and death benefit of sum assured of the said LIC policy of their son Tapas Ghosh

The OPs 1 & 2 LICI have contested this case by filing a written version denying and disputing, inter alia, the claim and contention of the complainant with prayer for dismissal of the case with cost.  The specific stand of the OPs are that the claimant No. 1 Bipad Ghosh intimated them regarding the death of her son (Life Assured) Tapas Ghosh on 30.07.14 by post along with photocopy of policy bond, post mortem report, F.I.R.   After receiving such intimation the LICI sent a letter with claim form and other required papers to the claimants on 06.08.14 through speed post with intimation that Life assured was a minor and he did not execute any nominee of his policy after attaining majority and as such after death of Tapas Ghosh claim against his policy has become open titled and the LICI also called for succession certificate to ascertain the titles of the claimants.  On 22.02.16 the LIC received a letter from claimant No. 1 and they answered the said letter on 05.03.16 through speed post along with required claim form and other papers to the claimants as per their recorded address but the said letter returned undelivered with comment of the postal authority “not known”.  Thereafter LICI sent several letters and claim forms to the claimants as per their recorded address but those letters were returned undelivered with note “not known”.  The LIC also intimated the agent No. 06600/445 of the Life Assured but no fruitful result came out.  As per the policy terms the claimants are entitled to get only the death benefit of the sum assured of Rs. 75,000/- and not the maturity sum assured.  There was no laches or deficiency in service on the part of the LICI.

POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION

Is the case maintainable both law and fact?

Are the complainants consumers of OPs?

Are the OPs guilty for deficiency in service and/or unfair trade practice as alleged?  

Are the complainants entitled to get the reliefs as prayed for?

DECISION WITH REASONS

  All points are taken up together for consideration and decision.  

We have heard arguments of Ld. Lawyers for both sides in full.  After due consideration of the materials on record i.e., the petition of complaint, written version, evidence adduced by the parties, the written arguments, the documents filed by the parties and the oral arguments advanced by the Ld. Lawyers of both sides, we find that admittedly, the LIC Jeevan Saral Policy in question being No. 428960276 was purchased in the name of Tapas Ghosh, since deceased, from the OP LICI and the date of commencement of the policy was on 28.09.2010 for 15 years and the date of maturity of the policy was on 28.09.2025.  

Now we find that as per terms & conditions of this policy the Life Assured can get maturity sum assured amounting to Rs. 58,968/- on the date of maturity i.e., on 28.09.25 if he alive and if Life Assured expired before the date of maturity the recorded nominee will get only death benefit, sum assured amounting to Rs. 75,000/-.  In our present case, admittedly the Life Assured, Tapas Ghosh died on 27.02.13 in a road traffic accident.  Therefore, as per terms & conditions of the said policy the nominee of the deceased L.A. is entitled to get Rs. 75,000/- towards death benefit only.  Admittedly, Life Assured, Tapas Ghosh did not select any nominee of his policy after attaining majority.  The petitioners/complainants being the father and mother of the Life Assured, Tapas Ghosh are the legal heirs as well as beneficiaries of their deceased son, Tapas.  Therefore, they are entitled to claim and get only Rs. 75,000/- from OP LICI as death benefit as per terms of the policy.  From the materials on record it is coming out that there was communication gap in between the LIC authority and the claimants / complainants regarding settlement of claim of the complainants due to recorded address of the Life Assured in the office of LICI so the LICI authority could not communicate anything to the present claimants / complainants in the matter of settlement of their claim.  Now, we find that this case was filed on 06.09.16 and the OP LICI has submitted their written version on 26.10.16.  So it can be said that the matter could be settled amicably long before final hearing of the case if there was any attempt from the OP to settle the claim amicably.  But no such attempt was made by the side of the OP LICI to settle the claim of the complainants amicably before final hearing of this case.  

In this view of the matter, we have no hesitation to hold that the case is maintainable and the complainants being the legal heirs as well as beneficiaries of their son Life Assured, Tapas Ghosh are the consumers of OP LICI and as per the terms of the LICI policy in question they are entitled to get the death benefit of sum assured amounting to Rs. 75,000/-.  Here we must say that there was some communication gap in between the OP LICI and the claimants / complainants regarding settlement of their claim and there was no willful laches and/or deficiency in service on the part of OP LICI in the matter of settlement of claim of the complainants.  

In view of the aforesaid discussion made here in before, we find sufficient reason to hold that the case is well maintainable,  the complainant are the consumers and that the complainants are entitled to get Rs. 75,000/- only from the OP LICI towards death benefit of their son Tapas since deceased as per terms of the policy in question.  All points are disposed of.  In result the case succeeds.  

Hence, it is,

Ordered,

That the case / application is allowed in part on contest with litigation cost of Rs.2,000/-.  The complainants do get an award of Rs. 75,000/- with interest @ 7% p.a. from the date of filing of the case (i.e., from 06.09.2016) against the OPs.  

OPs LICI is hereby directed to pay the complainants the aforesaid sum of money amounting to Rs. 75000/- + interest @ 7% per annum from 06.09.2016 along with litigation cost of Rs. 2,000/- within 30 days from the date of this order failing which the entire amount will carry further interest @ 8% p.a. till realization and the complainant shall be at liberty to realize the same in accordance with the provision of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  

Let a plain copy of this final order be supplied to the parties / their Ld. Advocates / agents forthwith free of cost or send by ordinary post.