| Complaint Case No. CC/200/2020 | | ( Date of Filing : 16 Oct 2020 ) |
| | | | 1. AMIT KOHLI | | FLAT NO 7-C, PLOT NO 10, DEEPA APARTMENT, PATPARGANG, DELHI-92 |
| ...........Complainant(s) | |
| Versus | | 1. LIFE INS. CO. | | DDA OFFICE COMPLEX, IIIRD FLOOR, RAJENDER BHAWAN, RAJENDER PLACE, DELHI-08 |
| ............Opp.Party(s) |
|
|
| Final Order / Judgement | DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION (EAST) GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR, SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092 C.C. No. 200/2020 | Amit Kohli R/o. Rlat No. 7-C, Plot No. 10, Deepa Apartment, Patparganj, East Delhi, Delhi-110092. | ….Complainant | Versus | | LIC of India Through its Branch Manager Branch Unit-311 AT:- DDA Shopping/Office Complex, 3rd Floor, Rajender Bhawan, Rajender Place, Delhi-110008. | ……OP |
Date of Institution: 16.10.2020 Judgment Reserved on: 19.02.2024 Judgment Passed on: 15.03.2024 QUORUM: Sh. S.S. Malhotra (President) Sh. Ravi Kumar (Member) Ms. Rashmi Bansal (Member) Judgment By: Shri S.S. Malhotra (President) JUDGMENT - By this Judgment Commission shall dispose off the complaint of the complainant who is the husband of deceased policy holder/insured alleging deficiency in service in not paying the death claim of the insured being husband the only LR of the policy holder.
- Brief facts as stated by the Complainant in the complaint are that her wife being insured had an LIC policy from OP having IDV of Rs. 2 Lakh when she was unmarried and she had mentioned name of nominee as Smt. Vidya Kapoor, her mother. Subsequently Pooja Kapoor got married with complainant and had been paying instalments. Meanwhile Smt. Vidya Kapoor expired on 06.06.2017 but complainant despite her marriage & despite the death of nominee could not change the nominee & unfortunately Smt. Pooja Kapoor, his wife, also died on 01.08.2019. The complainant thereafter reported the death to the OP and lodged the claim against insurance policy, whereafter OP informed him to obtain Succession Certificate and it is submitted that Smt. Pooja Kapoor had one another LIC policy also, from Daryaganj office of LIC who processed the claim and even paid the insurance amount without asking Succession Certificate, but this OP is harassing the complainant by illegally asking requirement of Succession Certificate which amounts to deficiency in service, despite the fact that the complainant has already obtained Survival Certificate from the office DM at Preet Vihar and has also furnished the death certificate of the nominee Smt. Vidya Kapoor with the OP & therefore it is prayed that OP be directed to pay Rs. 2 Lakh i.e. insured value of the policy alongwith compensation of Rs.50,000/- and litigation charges of Rs. 30,000/- with interest.
- OP has filed written statement taking preliminary objection that the complaint case is not maintainable as there is no cause of action in favour of complainant, the complaint is false, frivolous and vexatious, complainant has concealed the material facts from the Commission, complainant has not come to court with clean hands and complaint is filed by mis-representing the facts.
- On merits the complainant’s wife had a policy of IDV of Rs. 2 Lakh, with the nominee as Smt. Vidya Kapoor is not denied but it is submitted that Smt. Pooja Kapoor never approached OP for changing the nominee’s name for her policy. As far as the surviving member certificate is concerned it is stated the same is yet to be proved by documentary evidence. It is further stated that as per law whenever policy holder or nominee dies, then the amount cannot be claimed by LR because the surviving LR has to be declared by the Hon’ble Court by way of Succession Certificate and it is the only court from where succession certificate is obtained which would decide as to whether the complainant is only LR of the insured and therefore the OP has demanded the Succession Certificate from complainant within parameters of the law which cannot be termed as deficiency in service & therefore claim of the complainant be rejected.
- The complainant has filed rejoinder in which he has denied the contents of the written statement and has reiterated the contents of the complaint. Complainant has filed evidence of his own. OP has filed evidence of Sh. Biju George, Manager Legal. Both the parties have filed their written arguments.
- The Commission has heard the arguments and perused the record. The basic argument of Ld. Counsel for Complainant is that her wife had two LIC policies one from the office of OP, and another from the OP, but issued by Daryaganj Branch and on similar facts and circumstances, the office of OP at Daryaganj has not demanded the Succession Certificate & the insured amount has been paid to the claimant, whereas the office of OP at its office is trying to entangle the complainant into legal formalities by asking him to obtained Succession Certificate, whereas the surviving certificate has already been given to the OP and this amounts to deficiency in service.
- Ld. Counsel for OP on the other hand has argued that the releasing the insured amount by the office of Daryaganj w.r.t. the payment of insured amount to the complainant was prerogative of the manager concerned but as per law the Succession Certificate is required and asking of Succession Certificate from the complainant cannot be termed as deficiency as what the office of OP is asking is only for complying with the legal parameters, before the policy amount be released to the complainant to avoid future litigation w.r.t. the number of LRs or w.r.t. any other claim.
- The contention of Ld. Counsel for OP is at better footing than that of complainant. It has to be understood that if a document is being demanded by the insurance company as per the law then that cannot be termed as deficiency as discretion by officer of another branch may be an example of kind-heartedness but that cannot be termed that other office who is asking a particular document under the provision of law, is doing same thing illegal. Therefore it would have been better, if the OP would have also released the amount by taking Survival Certificate which has been furnished to the OP. However the contention of OP is that Succession Certificate only decides the number of LR is not well found, rather the settled principle of law by now is that even the Succession Certificate is granted after submitting the Survival Certificate in the court, so that the controversy w.r.t. legal heir be adjudicated & the amount be released. In these facts & circumstances this Commission hereby orders as follows;
- OP would release Rs.2,00,000/- to the complainant and pay interest 12% alongwith litigation cost of Rs.5,000/-. However, in these circumstances the compensation is not being awarded as of now as OP was well within its right to ask for Succession Certificate.
- This Order is to be complied within 30 days from the date of receiving the order & in case the OP would not pay the amount within 30 days the rate of interest would be @15% from the date of filing the complaint upto the date of realization on the entire amount.
- opy of the Order be supplied/sent to both the Parties free of cost as per rules.
Announced on 15.03.2024. File be consigned to Record Room. | |