This case has arisen out of application U/s 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
The case of the applicant is that on 22.10.2018 Uday Singha S/o:Late Sadhin Singha died leaving behind his two wives Basaona Singha & Shantana Singha @ Santana Singha and mother Tulshi Singha as legal heirs. On 04.01.2019 applicant Rakesh Singha, S/o:Bablu Singha married to Shantana Singha @ Santana Singha, widow of Late Uday Singha & D/o:Balaram Lala as per Hindu Rites & Customs, held at the house of her father Balaram Lala but the applicant could not get the marriage registered.
That in the year 2019 lives of applicant Rakesh Singha & Shantana Singha@Santana Singha have been insured by S.B.I. Life Insurance Co. Ltd policies vide No:1K378048010, dated 01.03.2019 & 1K301253506, dated 18.02.2019 (Date of Commencement & Risk), issued to Shantana Singha & Rakesh Singha respectively, wherein Rakesh Singha was nominee of Life insured Shantana Singha & Shantana Singha was the nominee of life insured Rakesh Singha.
That on 17.08.2019 Shantana Singha being a pillion rider of the motor cycle vide Registration No:W.B60T/1901 of Rakesh Singha met with an accident and she was fallen down at Vill:Rahatpur, Sishatala over N.H.34 & died at spot & Karandighi P.S UD Case No:40/19, dated 17.08.2019, U/s 174 of CRPC was started. The Police of Dalkhola P.S seized the vehicle in c/w Dalkhola P.S Case No:199/2019 & Rakesh Singha got released on bail.
That thereafter, applicant Rakesh Singha submits claim by producing insurance certificate of Shantana Singha & other documents but O.P.No:1 is showing different pretext to pay Rs.10,00,000/- as sum assured and to return Rs.1,00,000/- as premium taken on 02.03.2020 back to the complainant and as such O.Ps have committed the acts as mental torture and unfair trade practice & means upon the applicant. He prays for direction to the O.Ps to pay Rs.11,00,000/- as sum assured & premium collection, Rs.8,00,000/- as compensation for mental torture, unfair trade practice & means etc.
O.P.No:1&2 contested the case by filing W.V stating that the deceased Smt. Shantana Singha had submitted a duly filled in and signed proposal form for S.B.I Life-Smart Wealth Builder Policy, dated 13.02.2019 with annual installment premium of Rs.1,00,000/- for a premium paying term of 5 years. Relying on such information to be true and accurate, policy bearing No:1K378048010 was issued with date of commencement as 01.03.2019 for a basic sum assured Rs.10,00,000/-. Smt. Shantana Singha had nominated Mr. Rakesh Singha the complainant as the nominee under the policy and the relationship with the proposer was mentioned as “Husband.” They came to know about the death of Shantana Singha only after receipt of notice & complaint copy from this Commission where it was averred that Shantana Singha died on 17.08.2019. Hence, they have not been provided with the requisite documents viz original policy document, original Death Certificate from Municipal/Local Authority, claimant’s statement and claim form in prescribed formats by the complainant, P.M.Reprot & F.I.R, if any, upon which admissibility or otherwise of the claim can be assessed and decided. In the absence of requirements to examine the admissibility or otherwise of the claim, they are not able to ascertain it. There was no deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. They pray for dismissal of the complaint filed at premature stage.
O.P.No:3&4 submits separate W.V denying the case of the applicant stating that Shantana Singha D/o:Pro O.P.No:3&4 gave marriage with one Uday Singha about 19/20 years back but on 22.10.2018 said Uday Singha died leaving behind Shantana Singha as his only wife & after death of Uday singha, Shantana Singha started to live with her parents. She got some landed property from her mother-in-law Tulsi Sarnakar & some cash amount which she has deposited in S.B.I, Dalkhola Branch, S.B.I Life Ltd. There was no any marriage between Rakesh Singha & Shantana Singha on 04.01.2019 or any other day and they never live together as husband and wife. Rakesh Singha was trying to built up illicit relation with Shantana Singha when it was came to his notice that Shantana is the owner of land and cash deposit at bank, being residents of same locality & started to project himself as the husband of Shantana Singha. His proposal for marriage was declined by Shantana Singha as Rakesh Singha was her brother-in-law by relation. When Rakesh noticed that Shantana Singha wish to deposit Rs.1,00,000/- in bank, after misguiding her and projecting himself as her nominee took that S.B.I Life policy.
That on 17.08.2019 Rakesh Singha after pre-plan murdered Shantana Singha in Dalkhola with an intention to grab the money of LIC Policy. Her brother Mangal Lala lodged an F.I.R before Dalkhola P.S against Rakesh Singha for murder his sister Shantana Singha & Dalkhola P.S case No:199/19, dated 17/08/2019 U/s 302 IPC was started and Police submits charge sheet No:273/19, dated 19/11/2019, vide GR 2100/19 against Rakesh Singha. Rakesh was arrested by the Police who was released on bail from Hon’ble Calcutta High Court, granted in Sessions Case No:66/2021 of Additional District & Session Judge 2nd Court, Islampur, which is pending & at this stage this consumer complaint is not maintainable. If it assumed that Rakesh Singha was the husband of Shantana Singha, then for the charge of murder, Rakesh Singha is disqualified for getting the property of Shantana Singha according to Section 25 of Hindu Succession Act, 1956. They also pray for dismissal of the case.
Points for consideration
- Whether there was any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps?
ii Whether the complainant is entitled to get relief as prayed
for?
Decision with Reasons
It is not disputed that Shantana Singha D/o: Balaram Lala & Puspa Lala(Profroma O.P.No:3&4) of Vill:Raniganj, P.O:Patnour, P.S:Dalkhola, Dist:Uttar Dinajpur got married to one Uday Singha S/o:Late Sadhin Singha of same village & said Uday Singha died on 22.10.2018.
Applicant’s case is that Uday Singha died leaving behind two wives Basaona Singha & Shantana Singha @ Santana Singha and mother Tulshi Singha as legal heirs.
Proforma O.Ps case is that Uday Singha died leaving behind Shantana Singha as his only wife and She got some landed property from her mother-in-law Tulsi Swarnakar vide Gift deed No:5475/2018, dated 05.12.2018 & some cash amount.
Applicant has failed to prove existence of Uday Singha’s another wife Basaona Singha(as claimed by him) by producing adequate document.
Tulshi Singha or Tulsi Swarnakar (as claimed by the parties respectively) was/is same & identical person, the mother-in-law of Shantana Singha. Whether said Tulshi is alive or dead, not found. Applicant is silent as to gift of landed property & cash by Uday’s mother Tulsi to her daughter-in-law Shantana Singha, but it is not relevant in this case. Father’s name Balaram Lala depicts in Shantana’s Pan Card. Name of Uday Singha are recorded in Shantana’s Aadhar Card, Voter Identity Card.
It is also not disputed that Rakesh Singha S/o:Bablu Singha is a resident of same village. Applicant claimed that he was married to Shantana Singha on 04.01.2019. He admits that he could not get the marriage registered due to unaware of law & as to why he is unable to show any document in respect of that marriage.
Parents of Shantana Singha i.e Proforma O.P.No:3 & 4 denied such marriage & their marital relationship. According to them seeing her property & cash Rakesh was trying to built up illicit relation with Shantana but she refused to marry Rakesh as he was her brother-in-law by relation.
The applicant by filing this consumer complaint tried to establish said marriage by oral evidence of the witnesses as required in Hindu Rites & Customs, but it should not be ascertained by this Commission, to be ascertained by appropriate Court of Law. Thus we are not interested to evaluate the oral evidence of those witnesses.
Have a look at the documents produced. In joint savings bank A/c No:38088172319, of S.B.I, Dalkhola Branch is found Customer Name:Shantana Singha & Rakesh Singha, S/D/W/H/o:Uday Singh, that means the first holder was the wife of Uday Singh. Her relation with second holder Rakesh Singha is not found there.
It is not disputed that on 17.08.2019 Shantana Singha as pillion rider of the motor cycle bearing Registration No:W.B60T/1901 of Rakesh Singha sustained severe injuries at Vill:Rahatpur, Shisatala over N.H.34 & Karandighi UD Case No:40/19, dated 17.08.2019 U/s 174 Cr.P.C was initially started, dead body was brought to Karandighi BPHC Hospital & Surathal report of her dead body was prepared under instruction of OC, Karandighi P.S and on 18.08.2019 post mortem was done over the dead body of the deceased and report No:516 was submitted as “ death was due to the effects of injuries as noted above-ante mortem in nature. Further opinion if needed will be given after receipt of FSL report on preserved materials.”
Surathal report, challan for use when a dead body is sent for examination and P.M.No:516 depicts the deceased Shantana Singha as wife of Rakesh Singha. Receipt of burning ghat dated 18.08.2019 also depicts Shantana Singha as wife of Rakesh Singha.
On the other hand Death Certificate issued by Competent Authority, registered on 17.09.2019 depicts Shantana Singha’s Place of Death:Rural Hospital, Karandighi, Name of Husband/Wife:Late Uday Singha, Name of Father:Balaram Lala, Name of Mother:Puspa Lala.
Admittedly, Mangal Lala, brother of deceased Shantana Lala lodged a written complaint/FIR to the OC, Dalkhola P.S, registered as Dalkhola P.S GDE No:644, dated 17.08.2019 & started Dalkhola P.S Case No:199/19, dated 17.08.2019 U/s 302 of IPC & Charge Sheet No:273/19, dated 13.11.2019 U/s 302 IPC has been submitted against Rakesh Singha vide GR No:2100/19 & case was committed to Sessions Court(Sess-66/2021) & Ld. Additional District & Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Islampur, released Rakesh Singha on bail as granted by the Hon’ble High Court in c/w CRN No:11645 of 2019 & said Sessions case is pending for trial.
Again we reiterate that in consumer complaint marriage or no marriage of Shantana Singha & Rakesh Singha cannot be ascertained, we are concerned with whether or not Rakesh Singha is entitled to get claim from Insurance Company/O.P.No:1&2.
Ld. Advocate for Proforma O.P.No:3&4 argued that being a murderer Rakesh Singha is not entitled to get the claim U/s 25 of Hindu Succession Act, 1956. It runs as:
25. Murdered disqualified
A person who commits murder or abets the commission of murder shall be disqualified from inheriting the property of the person murdered, or any other property in furtherance of the succession to which he or she committed or abetted the commission of the murder.
Respectfully we disagree with such argument and of the opinion that such disqualification shall take effect only after conviction for murder U/s 302 of IPC.
It is admitted by O.P.No:1&2 that the deceased Shantana Singha had submitted a duly filled in and signed proposal form for S.B.I Life-Smart Wealth Builder Policy, dated 13.02.2019 with annual installment premium of Rs.1,00,000/- for a premium paying term of 5 years & relying on such information to be true and accurate, Policy bearing No:1K378048010 was issued with date of commencement as 01.03.2019 for a basic sum assured Rs.10,00,000/-. Shantana Singha had nominated Rakesh Singha (the applicant) as the nominee under the policy and the relationship with the proposer was mentioned as “Husband.”
Applicant’s document shows that similarly, Rakesh Singha had submitted a duly filled in and signed proposal form for S.B.I Life-Smart Wealth Builder Policy, dated 13.02.2019 with annual installment premium of Rs.1,00,000/- for a premium paying term of 5 years & relying on such information to be true and accurate, Policy bearing No:1K301253506, dated 18.02.2019 was issued (date of commencement of policy & risk) for a basic sum assured Rs.10,00,000/-. Rakesh Singha had nominated Shantana Singha (the deceased) as the nominee under the policy and the relationship with the proposer was mentioned as “Wife.”
Settled position of Law is once accepted/admitted cannot be denied. The Insurance Company once on being satisfied with the information given by the proposers in proposal forms, issued policies to Rakesh Singha & Shantana Singha with their relationship as husband & wife, being nominee of each other’s policy, cannot & shall not go beyond thereof. We are of the opinion that Insurance Company has no concern about the marriage dispute of Rakesh Singha & family members of insured Shantana Singha, rather Insurance Company is held liable to pay the claim of Rakesh Singha, the recorded nominee of deceased/insured Shantana Singha.
The case of O.P.No:1&2 with regard to gathering its knowledge of death of Shantana Singha after receipt of notice & complaint copy from this Commission, is here Insurance Company’s only concern. Rakesh Singha the recorded nominee of the deceased policy holder Shantana Singha should have informed the Insurance Company & submits claim with required documents. That means the consumer complaint is pre mature. Consequently we find no deficiency in service on the part of O.P.No:1&2.
In the result the claim fails.
Hence, it is
O R D E R E D
that the C.C-55/2020 be and the same is dismissed on contest against the O.Ps but without cost.
The applicant Rakesh Singha is given an opportunity to submit documents as required by the Insurance Company to settle his claim, either in furtherance of claim form submitted by him on 09.10.2020, or afresh, as soon as possible.
The insurer/S.B.I Life Insurance Co. Ltd & its Authority is/are directed to consider the claim of Rakesh Singha within 01 month from the date of submission of Claim Form with required documents.
Let a copy of this order be given to the parties free of cost.
