::BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AT BIDAR::
C.C. No.61/2017.
Date of filing: 20.09.2017.
Date of disposal: 26.09.2018.
P R E S E N T:-
(1) Shri. Jagannath Prasad Udgata, B.A., LL.B.,
President
(2) Shri. Shankrappa (Halipurgi),
B.A.LL.B.,
Member.
COMPLAINANT/S: Smt.Chandrakala W/o Late Veerbhadrappa Panchal,
Age:Major, Occ: Household,
R/o Village Talmadgi Tq: Humnbad Dist: Bidar
Now Residing in the house of her father-in-law
at Shivnagar South Bidar.
( By Sri.H.Prabhurao T.,Adv.)
VERSUS
OPPONENT/S: 1) The Managing Director and Chief Executive
Officer, SBI Life Insurance Company Ltd.,
Registered and Corporate Office, Natraj, M.V.
Road, and Western Express Highway Junction,
Andheri East Mumbai 400 053.
2). The Branch Manager, State bank of India
Br. Mannaekhelli 585227
Tq: Humnabad
(By.R.1.Smt.Padma Maharaj.,
R.2. M.A.Khan., Adv.)
:: J UD G M E N T ::
By Shri. Jagannath Prasad Udgata, President.
This is a case by the widow of home loan policy holder of O.P.No.1 and borrower of O.P.No.2 u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 alleging deficiency of service against both opponents.
2. The averments of the complaint are that, one late Veerabhadrappa Panchal, the husband of the complainant was working as a Lecturer in Chandrashekar P.U. College, Mannaekhelli, Tq-Humnabad in Bidar district. During his life time, said Veerabhadrappa had availed housing loan of Rs.3,90,000/- on 18.06.2007 for purchase of plotNo.46, corresponding to C.M.C. No.19-1-153 at Shivanagar South, Bidar Town. He had purchased a Super Suraksha Plan of S.B.I. Housing Loan Group Insurance Scheme vide account No.10738196783 under Master policy No.83001000203 date: 19.06.2007, which was issued through OP.No.2. The terms of the Master Policy covers to the extent of outstanding loan amount and interest as on the date of death of the policy holder, calculated as per the original E.M.I. Schedule. The Life Assured was paying the E.M.I.s regularly till his death and the complainant was the nominee of the policy.
3. The Life Assured Late Veerabhadrappa died in a road accident on 09.07.2008 and as on that date the outstanding balance of the housing loan was Rs.3,80,580/-. As per terms of the policy. consequent upon the death of Life Assured no installment was payable further. The complainant submitted her claim to theO.P.No.1 through O.P.No.2 Bank. The O.P.No.1, Insurance company settled the claim at Rs.3,74,356/- credited to the loan account of the deceased policy holder.
4. It is further stated by the complainant that, though she had submitted claim form promptly through the O.P.No.2 Bank, its’ transmission to the O.P.No.1 was delayed unduly and her settlement of claim was held up for two years. Further, there being a short payment as claim settlement by an amount of Rs.6,224/- the loan account was not fully closed.
5. She further alleges that, violating the norms, the O.P. Bank went on levying interest on her and even collected an amount of Rs.17,467/- from the college Principal, employer of the Life Assured(towards his back entitlements) and forced her to remit another sum of Rs.18,000/-, both on 07.02.2011. Thus inspite of collecting additional amount of Rs.35,647/- the O.P.No.2 bank did not close the home loan account inspite of her several approaches and ultimately, she got issued a legal notice on 15.12.2016. On receipt of notice only the O.P.No.1 replied reiterating that, her claim has been already settled by payment of Rs.3,74,356/- to the loan account, thereby refusing to entertain her demands. The O.P.No.2 maintained a stoic silence for which, she has approached this forum seeking a claim of Rs.6224/- from O.P.No.1, Rs.35,467/- from O.P.nO.2 with interest @ 18% p.a. and compensatory costs ofRs.50,000/-.
6. Both the opponents upon receiving notice had put up appearances through counsels and have filed written versions.
7. In the versions, the O.P.No.1 has in a tell tale manner raised a question of territorial jurisdiction oblivious of the fact that, part of the cause of action (grant of loan) had arisen at Mannekhelli of Bidar District. There was a further preliminary objection regarding delay in filing this complaint, which we have overruled vide separate orders date: 12.09.2018.
8. The O.P.No.1 has submitted versions admitting the fact of obtainment of Housing loan policy and that, it received the claim intimation on 08.08.2009 and had settled the claim by crediting an amount of Rs.3,74,356/- on 17.08.2009 to the loan account No.10738196783 held with O.P.No.2 directly. However in Para-2 of Page-6 of the versions. The O.P.No.1 submits that, factually, there was a short payment (deficit Rs.6224/-) and it is ready and willing to pay such amount along with 11.25% interest p.a. , calculated from 17.08.2009 till date. It is further the stand of the O.P.No.1 that, it being agreeable to reimburse the amount the complaint is in-fructuous (sic).
9. The stand of the O.P.No.2 is still more bizarre and the submissions are hallucinatory contradicting the documents produced by the bank itself. The Bank states that, the loan accounts balance was Rs.3,84,216/- and not Rs.3,80,580/- as claimed by the complainant. It further claims, the claim processing was done by it at the earliest, the delay occurred due to non submission of documents and the O.P.No.1 had paid the claim settlement amounting to Rs.3,81,000/- on 04.09.2009. The Bank further denies recoveries from the employer of the borrower and the complainant herself on 07.02.2011 and that, payment by complainant was voluntary, which was adjusted to the residue of principal and interest of borrowed amount. The Bank as a whole disputes the complaint averments and claim that, it has tried to help the widow by sending a compromise proposal to the higher authorities and the same was rejected due to some, unspecified regulations. The Bank is vociferous that, there is no deficiency of service in its part and prays for rejection of the complaint.
10. The parties to the dispute have filed evidence affidavits reiterating their respective stands, written arguments were received, both sides were heard in length. The parties have submitted documents listed under this order.
11. Considering the pleadings of the parties to the dispute, the following points arise for our consideration.
- Does the complainant prove the deficiency of service in the part of the opponents?
- What orders?
12. Our answers to the points raised are as following:-
- In the affirmative.
- As per final orders, owing to the following:-
:: REASONS ::
13. Point.No.1: From the pleadings and documents submitted by the opponents, it appears, they are trying to camouflage their respective follies and latches by resorting to jugglery of words. From the document produced as Annexure-R.8 by theO.P.No.2 bank, it is perceived that, the first claim was lodged with it on 29.07.2008. In one of the appendix of this document the claim amount has been mentioned as Rs.3,80,580/- and duly attested by its’ Manager. This falsifies the bank’s demand that, an amount of Rs.3,84,216/- was balance of the loan account. Next, neither the bank discloses the date of transmission of the claim to the Insurer, nor the later discloses, the date of receipt of the same. It is surprising as to how, the claim filed on 29.07.2008 could be kept in the back burner by either of the parties. Then assuming that, the O.P.No.1received the claim form on 08.08.2009 and settled the claim, though in a lesser figure on 17.08.2009, how the crediting could be done only on 04.09.2009 as is evident from Annexure-R.11 (A/c statement) filed by the bank. Moreover in the same document, it is seen that, as on the date of death the liability has been calculated at Rs.3,80,580/- and not otherwise being pleaded by the O.P.No.2. It is also further observed that, inspite of receiving the death intimation, the Bank has gone on charging interest at varied rates, instead of interacting with O.P.No.1 taking into confidence the nominee of the dead Life Assured. More amusingly, it is also observed that, the bank has credited the loan a/c with two interest payments, another receipt of Rs.17,467/- from the Principal and a further cash payment of Rs.18,000/- and the chronology justifies the allegation of deficiency of service as against O.P.No.2.
14. As far as O.P.No.1 is concerned, though it admits a short fall of entitlements by Rs.6224/- and has shown its’ willingness to pay the same with interest @ 11.25 p.a. no visible attempts were ever made to remit the amount either to the complainant or remittance to the forum. The admission has remained a dangling carrot before the rabbit throughout.
15. Hence, answering the Point No.1 accordingly we proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER.
- The complaint is allowed in part.
- The O.P.No.1 is directed to refund the admitted amount of Rs.6224/- together with interest @ 11.25 p.a. calculated from 17.08.2009, till realisation;
- The O.P.NO.2 is directed to refund a sum of Rs.35,367/- collected in violation of norms with interest @ 12% p.a. calculated from the submission of claim i.e. 07.02.2011 till realisation;
- Both O.P.s are directed to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- each towards compensatory costs and a further sum of Rs.3,000/- each towards litigation expenses;
- Four weeks time granted to comply this order.
(Typed to our dictation then corrected, signed by us and then pronounced in the open Forum on this 22nd day of September 2018).
Sri. Shankrappa H. Sri. Jagannath Prasad
Member. President.
Documents produced by the complainant
- Annexure.A- Copy of insurance certificate.
- Annexure.B– Copy of statement of account of S.B.I. date: 14.10.2016.
- Annexure.C- Office coy of legal notice 24.10.2016.
- Annexure. D– Office copy of legal notice 15.12.2016.
- Annexure.E to J-(I-omitted) Original postal receipts.
- Annexure.K- Return postalcover in respect of O.P.No.1.
- Annexure-L- Reply of O.P.No.1date:10.01.2017.
Document produced by the Opponents.No.1
- Annexure.R.1-Copy of letter date: 09.10.2003 to General Manager of
S.B.I. - Annexure.R.2- Copy of application of the deceased life assured.
- Annexure.R.3- Copy of certificate of insurance.
- Annexure.R.4- Copy of letter date: 18.08.2009 from the O.P.No.1 in
the address of the complainant. - Annexure.R.5-Copy of legal notice of complainant side
date:15.12.2016 to both O.P.s. - Annexure.R.6- Copy of letter date: 10.01.2017 of theO.P.No.1 in the
address of complainant and her counsel. - Annexure.R.7- Copy of the letter date: 10.01.2017 of theO.P.No.1 in
the address of the complainant only.
Document produced by the Opponents.No.2.
- Annexure.R.8- Letter intimating death of Life Assured date:
29.07.2008. - Annexure.R.9- Copy of the bunch of papers on death claim.
- Annexure.R.10- Copy of death certificate of Late Veerbhadrappa.
- Annexure.R.11- Account Statementof SBI Mannekhelli date:
22.03.2018. - Annexure.R.12-Certificate of O.P.No.2 under crohigence of bankers
book evidence Act.
Witness examined.
Complainant.
- P.W.1- Smt.Chandrakala W/o Late Panchal Veerabhadrappa.
Opponent.
- R.W.1- Mss.Dhanya K.P. W/o Sri Unnikrishanan K.P. Authorized
representative of S.B.I. Life Insurance Company Limited
Mumbai. - R.W.2- Sri Prakash S/o Gems Manager and Authorised officer State
Bank of India Mannaekhelli Branch.
Sri. Shankrappa H. Sri. Jagannath Prasad
Member. President.
