IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Tuesday the 30th May, 2017.
Filed on 02/04/2016
Present
- Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
- Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
- Smt. Jasmine D (Member)
in
C.C.No.113/2016
between
Complainants:- Opposite parties:-
Sri. P.KrishnakumarThe Branch Manager
Thulamparambu NaduvathumuryVellakkinar, Alappuzha.
Haripad PO,(Now Residing at(By Adv.P.K.Mathew)
Kedaram, Kandiyoor,
Thattarambalam PO
(By Adv.Viswanathan Chettiar)
O R D E R
SMT. ELIZABETH GEORGE(PRESIDENT)
The case of the complainant is as follows:-
Complainant is working as an employee under the Devaswom Board at Mavelikkara. He had taken a policy from the opposite party in the year 1992 for Rs. 1,00,000/- under the Salary Savings Scheme. As per the scheme an amount of Rs.334/- was taken monthly from the salary of the complainant as premium by the opposite party. But the opposite party accounted the premium only from 5/1992 to 6/2005. Thereafter no premium amount was accounted by the opposite party. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party the complaint is filed.
2. Version of the opposite party is as follows:-
There is no defective service on the part of the LIC. The petitioner has no cause of action against LIC. The opposite party has accounted premium from 05/1992 to 06/2005. After that the policy was transferred to Mavelikara Branch of the Corporation with Quarterly mode. The amount received from 12/2008 to 11/2010 (Rs.8016) was refunded as the mode of the policy was changed. Again Rs.668/- was refunded on 20-03-2013 and Rs.5,344/- was refunded on
23-06-2014. The amount refunded thereafter(Rs.2672/- and Rs.1002/-) are available in the cheque cancelled account. The opposite party has Rs.3674/- in the cheque cancelled account and Rs.5344/- in Salary Savings Scheme Deposit. There is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party.
3.The complainant was examined as PW1. The documents produced were marked as Ext.A1 to A6. Ext.A6 marked subject to proof. Two witnesses were examined as PW2 and PW3. No oral or documentary evidence adduced from the part of the opposite party.
- Points for considerations are:-
- Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of opposite party?
- If so reliefs and costs?
- According to the complainant an amount of Rs.334/- was taken as premium from his salary by the opposite party from 05/1992 onwards without any default, but opposite party accounted his premium only f rom 05/1992 to 06/2005. Opposite party filed version admitting that they accounted the premium of the complainant from 05/1992 to 06/2005 and thereafter the policy transferred to Mavelikkara Branch of Corporation with quarterly mode. According to the opposite party they have refunded an amount of Rs.8016/- received from 12/2008 to 11/2010, Rs.668/- on 20/03/2013 and Rs.5344/- on 23/06/2014. Complainant admitted that he had received Rs.8550/- sent by the opposite party under the belief that it was a bonus. Thereafter he came to know that the opposite party was sending the cheque for the premium amount which was unaccounted by the opposite party. Hence he returned the other cheques. In order to substantiate the allegations of the complainant he has produced the statement of recovery from the salary of the complainant from 07/05 onwards and it is marked as Ext.A1 and A2. PW2 the Asst.Devaswom Commissioner Mavelikara deposed before the Forum that he was the salary drawing officer and he had remitted Rs.334/ each from the salary of the complainant with the opposite party. Ext.A1 and A2 show that the complainant had remitted premium amount with the opposite party till 2/2016. According to the opposite party they have accounted the premium of the complainant from 5/1992 to 6/2005 and after that the policy was transferred to Mavelikara Branch of the Corporation with quarterly mode. It is pertinent to notice that no evidence adduced from the part of the opposite party to prove that they have informed this method of transfer to the complainant. More over they used to accept the premium of the complainant after 2005 also. It is admitted by the complainant that he had received the cheque for Rs.8550/- issued by the opposite party thinking it as bonus sent by the opposite party. But he had not received any further amount sent by the opposite party. So it is the duty of the opposite party to prove that the complainant had encashed the further cheques sent by the opposite party. Since there is no documents to prove their version the contention of the opposite party that they have refunded the further premium amount to the complainant is not sustainable.
From the above discussion it is proved that complainant had remitted premium from 05/1992 to 02/2016. Opposite party has no right to take unilateral decision to transfer the policy of the complainant without informing the complainant. In this case they transferred the policy of the complainant without intimating him and that amounts to deficiency in service. Hence we are of considered opinion that the opposite party is bound to revive the policy of the complainant after receiving the amount of Rs. 8550/- which encashed by the complainant.
In the result complaint is allowed. The opposite party is directed to revive the policy on receipt of the amount of Rs.8550/- alone from the complainant without imposing any revival charge. The opposite party is further directed to pay Rs.4000/-(Rupees Four thousand only) towards compensation and Rs.1000/- (Rupees Thousand) towards costs to the complainant.
The Order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of this order.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant transcribed by her corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum on this the 30th day of May, 2017.
Sd/- Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
Sd/- Sri. Antony Xavier(Member)
Sd/- Smt. Jasmine.D (Member)
Appendix
Evidence of the complainant:
PW1 - P.Krishnakumar(Witness)
PW2 - K.Sreelatha(Witness)
PW3 - Sreekumar.D(Witness)
Ext.A1 - Copy of letter by Travancore Devaswom Board
Ext.A2 - Copy of letter dtd 3/5/16 by Travancore Devaswom Board
Ext.A3 _ Copy of letter dtd 16/3/15
Ext.A4 - Copy of letter dtd 1/7/15
Ext.A5 - Letter dtd 17/6/11 issued by LIC Ernakulam Division
Ext.A6 - Copy of letter dtd 25/3/15
Evidence of opposite party:
Nil
//True copy//
By Order
Senior Superintendent.
To
Complainant/Opposite party/S.F
