Karnataka

Gadag

CC/41/2015

Gopal .V.Baheti - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Divisional Manager, LIC of India and Others - Opp.Party(s)

M.A.Pujar

28 Oct 2016

ORDER

JUDGEMENT DELIVERED BY SRI.B.S.KERI, MEMBER

The complainant has filed this Complaint u/s 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 alleging deficiency in service against The Opposite parties (Herein after referred in short as Ops). 

 

2.    The brief facts of the Complaint is that the Complainant’s father had purchased a Policy from the Op No 1. The said policy bearing No.15974996, for Sum Assured Rs.10,000/-, Table & Term 80-33 (16), the date of commencement on 28.01.1980, premium paid in quarterly was Rs.309.80 and the date of maturity of the said policy was on 28.01.2013. On 08.10.1996, the Complainant received a letter from OP No.2 along with a cheque of Rs.2,478.40 paise same had been received by the Complainant. After lapse of 9 years, the Complainant has wrote a letter to the OP No.2 seeking information about the Policy and wrote two letters dated: 05.12.2005 and 08.09.2005. But, OP No.3 answer to those letter stating that the Policy has been already set-right. Till today the Complainant has not received any installment amount from the Ops.  Therefore, the Complainant got issued a legal notice through his counsel on 08.10.2010. OP No.2 replied to the legal notice on 23.10.2010 and seeking the correct Policy number from the Complainant. The Complainant submits that he had deposited the premium regularly. The OP had not paid the Sum Assured amount with Accrued Bonus after the date of the maturity But the OP No 2 had replied that the said policy maturity amount had been refunded to the Complainant through a Cheque in a sum of Rs.2,478-40 paise, dated: 08.10.1996. Hence, being no other way, Complainant is constrained to file the present Complaint and submits that Ops have committed deficiency of service on the part of Ops.

 

 

3.      Further, the Complainant prayed that OP No.3 issued “No payment history for this policy” hence Complainant prayed that set aside the last due date policy maturity value year and declared as 1996 instead of 2013, cost of the Complaint and any other relief deemed fit in the circumstances of the case.  

4.  The Forum received the Complaint and heard on admission. The notice was ordered as such OP No.1 remained absent after giving several opportunities. OP No.2 and 3 appeared through their advocate. Advocate filed their Vakalat and Written Version.

Brief facts of the Written Version of OP NO.2 & 3:

That the Ops have denied the averments made in the Complaint. Ops further submitted that the Complaint is not true and bonafides and it is not tenable either in law nor in facts. Hence, it deserves to be dismissed in limine, the Ops have stated in their Written Version that the Complainant had already received the amount of Rs.2,478.40 paise (Rupees two thousand four hundred and seventy eight and forty paise) on 08.10.1996. Further, the OPs stated that the contents mentioned in Para No.2 of the Complaint are about 20 years transaction as well as alleged dated mentioned in it i.e. on 05.12.2005, 08.09.2005 are more than 10 years. The OP No.2 has already intimated to the Complainant on 21.09.1995 stating that master is available necessary action to consider in respect of policy. Further, the Ops have stated that OP No.2 has already intimated by letter dated: 03.03.1988 to the Complainant. Inspite of the said letter has not paid the premium as agreed. The last premium is paid on January 1997. But the Complainant deliberately suppressed this fact. Due to non-payment of premium by the Complainant, the said policy had lapsed. The Complainant has issued legal notice on 08.10.2010 which is not correct. Hence, the OP stated that the Complaint is time barred by limitation. Hence, there is no cause of action arises.

 5.     Further, Ops submitted that the alleged reliefs sought by Complainant are of purely civil in nature. These reliefs does not come under the C.P. Act. Civil Court is having jurisdiction to consider the prayer, that the Complaint is bared by limitation. Hence pleased be dismiss the Complaint with heavy cost.

6.     In the background of the above said pleadings, the Complainant said in chief affidavit before this Forum as CW1 and filed the documents which are marked as EX P1 to P8 in his support of the allegation.  On the other hand, OP filed his written version and filed affidavit of one Sri.Satish S/o Dattatraya Rao Bankapur by way of affidavit evidence as RW1 and filed documents which are marked as EX R1 to R15. We heard the arguments and perused the affidavit and documents of respective parties.  

7.      On the basis of above said pleadings, oral and documentary evidence, the following points arises for adjudication are as follows:   

1.   2.	Whether the Complaint is barred by law of limitation?   Whether the Complainant proves that there was deficiency in service on the part of the OP?
3.	What Order?

 

Our Answer to the above Points are:-

Point No.1 – Affirmative,

Point No.2 – In view of affirmative findings on Point

                   NO.1, Point No.2 do not survive.

Point No.3 – As per the final order.

On consideration of pleadings, written version, evidence of Complaint and documents produced by the both parties and arguments, we answer the above points are as under:           

R E A S O N S

8.      POINT NO.1:  The main point arises here is that if the Complaint is within limitation, for that we proceed following discussion. 

9.   The Complainant has filed the Complaint against the Ops. The OP No.2 and 3 contended that this matter in their support, they have produced the documents. Copy of the Complainant letter EX OP No.6, maturity claim data sheet EX OP NO.1. Discharge of matured policy No.15974996, Sum of Rs.2,478=40 paise (Rupees two thousand four hundred and seventy eight and forty paise) dated: 28.10.1996 EX OP2, Complainant letter dated: 08.09.2005 have discussed with Gadag 1^st Branch Office. Intimation letter dated: 21.09.2005 EX OP No.3 and EX OP No.4 letter dated: 19.10.2006. The policy is in paid up condition with last premium paid 1/1997, dated: 27.07.2006. EX OP No.5 transferred the records of the policy, Gadag Branch dated: 24.02.1988. EX OP NO.7 benefits the claim amount of Rs.6,131/- payable date: 23.08.2012 informing letter, EX OP No.8 to Op No.10 and policy condition paper EX OP No.11.

10.   On perusal of these documents, it is clear that the Complainant had not received the cheque, the Complainant was well aware that he had not paid the any premium of the policy. The 1^st unpaid premium on January 1998, the last premium is paid on January 1997.

The legal notice sent by Complainant through his counsel dated: 08.10.2010 is replied by Op No 2 & 3 on 23.10.2010. The said policy was in reduced paid up condition as on date of maturity i.e. 28.01.2013, policy maturity amount Rs.6,131/- intimation was sent to the Complainant on October, 2012, January 2013 to March 2013 (EX OP8 to OP10). But, Complainant did not submit the discharge from the policy bond. Inspite of this, the OP NO.2 and 3 are ready to make a payment of Rs.6,131/- to Complainant. The first unpaid premium is 1/1998 subsequent premium are not paid by Complainant as per terms of contract, sec 2(1) (g) of CP Act therefore, there is no deficiency in OPs-service. The Complainant filed the Complaint before this Forum on 03.12.2015, in this time the complainant had not filed the application for condonation of delay. The Ops filed an objection to delay of the Complaint. The Complainant had not shown any interest to show the sufficient cause for date of filing the Complaint, since it is clear that Complainant is knowingly delay to file this Complaint. Hence, there is no sufficient cause of action arises to file the complaint. Complainant advocate issued a legal notice in 08.10.2010. Op No 2 & 3 issued reply letter dated: 23.10.2010 the complainant had not filed within period of 2 years from the receipt of reply letter complaint is barred by limitation. We relied upon a citation in 2016 (10) CPJ 121 (NC), New Delhi. The important points read as under ;

“(i) C.P. Act 1986 Section 24(A), 21 (b) - Limitation – Condonation of Delay – complainant was aware about cancellation of allotment letter in January 1985 and Op issued cancellation letter dated 27.06.1985 - complainant was not filed within period of  2 years from receipt of cancellation letter – complaint is barred by limitation.

Hence, for the above reasons and citations, we answer to Point No.1 in affirmative. 

11.    POINT NO.2:  In the light of our finding on Point No.1, Point NO.2 does not survive.

12.     POINT NO.3: For the reasons and discussions made above, findings on the above points, we proceed to pass a following; 

//ORDER//

1. This Complaint is dismissed.
2. The Complaint is barred by limitation.
3. Send the copies of this order to the parties free of cost.

 (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and then pronounced by me in the Open Court 28^th day of October, 2016)

 

 

Member

Member

President