State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Divisional Manager, National ... vs Ayesa Bibi & Others on 19 November, 2012
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission West Bengal BHABANI BHAVAN (GROUND FLOOR) 31, BELVEDERE ROAD, ALIPORE KOLKATA 700 027 SC.CASE NO. : FA/400/2011 DATE OF FILING : 08.09.2011 DATE OF FINAL ORDER: 19.11.2012 APPELLANTS 1. Divisional Manager National Insurance Co. Ltd. Malda Division 93A, Rabindra Avenue 2nd Floor, P.S. & Dist. Maldah. 2. The Branch Manager National Insurance Co. Ltd. Raigang Branch P.O. & P.S. Raiganj Dist. Uttar Dinajpur. RESPONDENT 1. Ayesa Bibi Wife of Rajesh Ali Daughter of Late Nurul Sk. Jote Anantapur P.O. Bangitola P.S. Kaliachak Dist. Malda. PROFORMA RESPONDENTS 2. The Manager Golden Trust Financial Services Raiganj Branch P.O. & P.S. Raiganj Dist. Uttar Dinajpur. 3. The Manager Golden Trust Financial Services S.B.Mansion 16, R.N.Mukherjee Road Kolkata-700 001. BEFORE : MEMBER : MR. D.BHATTACHARYA MEMBER : MR. J.BAG FOR THE APPELLANT : Mr. S.K.Chakraborty, Mr. Prasenjit Mitra, Ld. Advocates FOR THE RESPONDENT : Mr. Aloke Mukhopadhyay, Ld. Advocate Mr. Avik K.Dutt, Ld. Advocate : O R D E R :
Mr. J.Bag, Ld. Member The present Appeal is directed against the Order dated 20.06.2011 passed by the Learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum Malda in their D.F.Original Case No. 63/2010 in the matter of Ayesa Bibi (Complainant) vs- The Divisional Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd., Malda Division and others (OPs), the gist of the impugned order being that the OPs (No. 1 & 2) are liable to pay a sum of Rs.
300000/- (Three lakhs) only to the Complainant within 30 days from the date of the order failing which the amount shall carry 10% interest p.a. until recovery.
The Appeal case, in brief, is as follows:
Nurul Sk. took a policy under Scheme Janata Personal Accidental Insurance Policy, Policy No. being 100300/47/ 01/ 9600022/ 02/ 96/ 30442 valid on and from 31.03.2003 to 30.03.2018 with insured value of Rs. 300000/- (Three lakhs) only. Ayera Bibi, wife of the insured, was the nominee, but she died on 27.07.2006. The insured Nurul Sk.on 21.09.2007 died following a public fury and left behind his daughter as the only legal heir, Ayesa Bibi, who is the Complainant / Respondent. The petitioner Ayesa Bibi submitted necessary documents to the office of the OP No. 1 through OP No. 4 on 04.02.2008 in connection with her insurance claim. She met OP No. 1 and 4 several times in pursuance of her claim. On 05.02.2008 she came to know from the office of OP No. 3 that no action was taken by OP No. 1 till then. No steps being taken by the OPs the petitioner initially filed a complaint before the Ld. District Forum, Uttar Dinajpur in their Case No. 35/2009 and was awarded a favourable order against which the Appellant / National Insurance Co. Ltd. filed an appeal before this State Commission. The Appeal was allowed vide No. FA/220/2010 and by its order dated 01. 11.
2010 the matter was placed before the Ld. District Forum Malda, being DF Original Case No. 63/2010. The Case was contested by the OPs. OP Nos. 1 and 2 filed a written version challenging the maintainability of the case on a number of technical grounds and denying the material allegations of the complainant, particularly the alleged coverage of insurance or the entitlement of the complainant to the effect of the terms and conditions of the policy. OP Nos. 3&4, namely, Manager Golden Trust Financial Service Ltd., SB Mansion, 16, R N Mukherjee Road, Kolkata- 700001 and Manager, Golden Trust Financial Service Ltd., N H 34 (Peerless Building ) Rathbari, Dist. Malda, arguing that they had neither any role nor any authority to settle the claim or to reject such claim. They emphasized that the policy was issued by the National Insurance Co. Ltd. in favour of Golden Multi Services Club of Golden Trust Financial Services covering the insured person and according to the Memorandum of Understanding between the NIC Ltd. (OP 2) and OP Nos. 3 and 4 taken together, OP-2 has the exclusive right and authority to entertain, process and settle the claim. As such, they prayed for expunction of their names from the petition of complaint. The Ld. District Forum after due consideration of materials on record decided in favour of the complainant and ordered that an award of Rs. 300000/- is payable by the OP Nos. 1 and 2 individually and collectively by an account payee cheque within 30 days from the date of order, that is, 20. 06. 2011 faliing which the amount shall carry 10% interest p.a. from the date therof until recovery. Aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned order the Appellants preferred to file the present appeal.
The Appellants in their Memo of Appeal have, interalia, pointed out that the insured, Nurul Sk. was manhandled by a mob for his alleged attempt to commit extortion of silver ornaments and cash belonging to one Sudhendu Nag of Sharada Pally, Malda, and that the said insured succumbed to his injuries in the district hospital, Malda, a case being started by the Police of English Bazar P.S. u/s 304/34 of IPC against 300/400 miscreants vide English Bazar PS Case No.356/2007 dated 21. 09. 2007. Their grievance against the impugned order is that the death over public fury on a social offence cannot be compensated, in that event, a terrorist gunned down in an encounter also becomes eligible to get compensation. Relying upon the decision reported in 1997(1) CPR-40-NCDRC that decision of repudiation of claim by the LIC in good faith based on material collected pursuant to enquiries made is no deficiency in service on the part of the LIC, the Appellants have vouched for their action in repudiating the claim of the present Respondent No.1 Ayesa Bibi, the sole legal heir of the insured.
Decision with Reasons:
We have gone through the Memorandum of Appeal together with the complaint petition and the impugned order of the Ld. District Forum below. We have also heard the Ld. Advocates appearing for the Appellants and Respondents apart from perusing the Brief Notes of Arguments filed by and on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 2 & 3 along with the order dated 01.08.2011 passed by the Honble Supreme Court of India in SLP (Civil) No. 34115/2010 in RP No. 4591/ 2009 of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, the order dated 26. 11. 2008 of the Honble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, West Bengal in SC Case No. FA/08/226 in the matter of Mrs. Madhu vs- National Insurance Co.Ltd.and others cited by the Ld. Advocate of the Respondent and the order dated 27.01.2012 of the Honble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in the matter of National Insurance Co. Ltd. vs- Theegala Lakxmi and another, Revision Petition No. 1154 of 2006 from order dated 25. 11. 2005 in Appeal No. 1002/2003 of State Commission, Andhra Pradesh - decided on 27. 01 2012, reported in 11 (2012) CPJ (NC) placed by the Respondent No.1.We have heard the Ld. Advocates appearing for both parties and consulted the case records received from the lower forum.
It appears from the Terms, Conditions ,Exclusions, Definitions of the Policy in question that the appellant Insurance Company is not liable under the policy for payment of compensation in respect of death of the insured arising or resulting from the insured committing any breach of the law with criminal intent. The Appellant Insurance Company in their submission asserted that the insured being manhandled by a mob while he attempted to commit an offence succumbed to his injuries and the fact has been recorded by the English Bazar Police . They, however, did not furnish any independent credible evidence in support of their contention and in such case the evidence of the person from whom the person identified as Nurul Sk. , the insured tried to snatch the bag of silver ornaments allegedly thereby committing any breach of the law with criminal intent, though such evidence could be construed as an independent credible evidence as has been observed by the Honble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission while disposing of the Revision Petition No. 1154 of 2006 referred to hereinabove. The death of the insured, namely, Nurul. Sk. in the hands of the agitated mob as presented by the Appellants is after all an accidental death as distinguished from natural death. The insurance policy being a valid one on payment of premium due and the legal heirship of the claimant nominee, that is the Complainant No.1 Ayesa Bibi, has not been disputed by the Appellants. In due consideration of facts and circumstances and also in view of principle of law as cited by the Complainant / Respondent we are inclined to go with the decision of the Ld. District Forum below without interfering with the impugned order. The Appeal does not stand.
Hence ordered that the impugned order is affirmed and the Appeal is dismissed on contest. There shall be no order as to costs.
Let the lower case records along with this judgement be returned to the Forum below forthwith.
MEMBER MEMBER