State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Br. Manager, L.I.C. Of India. vs Sh. Rama Nand Sharma. & Anr. on 8 August, 2019
H.P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
SHIMLA.
(1) First Appeal No. : 140/2018
Date of Presentation: 01.01.2018
Order reserved on: 19.03.2019
Date of Order : 08.08.2019
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Branch Manager Life Insurance Corporation of India Branch
Office at CABR 2nd Floor Aggarwal Bhawan Sanjauli Shimla-171006.
... Appellant/opposite party No.1.
Versus
1. Rama Nand Sharma S/o Shri Jai Ram Sharma R/o Village
Parbheech P.O. Kelvi Tehsil Theog District Shimla. H.P.
... Respondent No.1/complainant
2. The Branch Manager UCO Bank Dharampur Tehsil Theog
District Shimla H.P.
... Respondent No.2/opposite party No.2
For Appellant : Mr. Narender Sharma Advocate.
For Respondent No.1: Mr. Amit Chauhan Advocate
For Respondent No.2: Ms. Neha vice Mr. Sanjay Dalmia
Advocate.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) First Appeal No.: 208/2018
Date of Presentation: 09.01.2018
Order Reserved on : 19.03.2019
Date of Order : 08.08.2019
Branch Manager UCO Bank Dharampur Tehsil Theog District
Shimla H.P.
.......... Appellant/Opposite party No.2
Versus
1. Rama Nand Sharma S/o Shri Jai Ram Sharma R/o Village
Parbhech P.O. Kelvi Tehsil Theog District Shimla-H.P.
... Respondent No.1/complainant
2. Branch Manager Life Insurance Corporation Office at CABR 2nd
Floor Aggarwal Bhawan Sanjauli Shimla-171006.
... Respondent No.2/opposite party No.1
...................................................................................................
Branch Manager Life Insurance Corporation of India Versus Rama Nand Sharma & Anr.
F.A. No.140/2018
&
Branch Manager UCO Bank Versus Rama Nand Sharma & Anr.
F.A. No.208/2018
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. P.S. Rana (R) President
Hon'ble Ms. Sunita Sharma Member.
Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes
For Appellant: Ms. Neha vice Mr. Sanjay Dalmia
Advocate.
For Respondent No.1: Mr. Amit Chauhan Advocate.
For Respondent No.2: Mr. Narender Sharma Advocate.
.......................................................................................
JUSTICE P.S. RANA (R) PRESIDENT :
O R D E R :-
1. Appeal No.140/2018 & Appeal No.208/2018 filed against same order passed by learned District Forum in consumer complaint No.184/2012 titled Rama Nand Sharma Versus The Branch Manager Life Insurance Corporation & Anr. Both appeals are consolidated for disposal in order to avoid conflicting orders.
Brief facts of consumer complaint:
2. Shri Rama Nand Sharma aged seventy four years filed consumer complaint under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 pleaded therein that complainant is rustic villager and complainant invested amount with opposite party No.2 i.e. UCO Bank Dharampur Tehsil Theog District Shimla H.P. which was to be matured in the year 2006. It is pleaded that complainant intended to encash the amount. It is pleaded that amount was invested by the 1 Whether Reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the order? yes 2 Branch Manager Life Insurance Corporation of India Versus Rama Nand Sharma & Anr. F.A. No.140/2018
& Branch Manager UCO Bank Versus Rama Nand Sharma & Anr. F.A. No.208/2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Branch Manager in LIC Office i.e. Opposite party No.1. It is further pleaded that Branch Manager did not allow complainant to withdraw amount and pressurized the complainant to invest the amount again. It is pleaded that policy was matured on 09.03.2011 and complainant was legally entitled to withdraw mature amount by way of encashment. It is pleaded that amount of the complainant was reinvested in a future policy by opposite party No.1 without consent of complainant. It is pleaded that wife of complainant fell ill and for medical treatment of wife complainant was in dire need of money and applied for release of insurance amount.
3. It is further pleaded that opposite party No.1 informed the complainant that amount was further invested in pension plan. It is further pleaded that policy was vested by opposite party No.1 in pension plan without taking prior consent of complainant. It is pleaded that opposite party committed deficiency in service. Complainant sought relief to the effect that opposite parties be directed to pay an amount of Rs.60000/-(Sixty thousand) alongwith maturity amount alongwith interest @ 18% per annum. Complainant also sought additional relief of Rs.20000/-(Twenty thousand) on account of unfair trade practice. Prayer for acceptance of consumer complaint sought.
3 Branch Manager Life Insurance Corporation of India Versus Rama Nand Sharma & Anr. F.A. No.140/2018
& Branch Manager UCO Bank Versus Rama Nand Sharma & Anr. F.A. No.208/2018
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Per contra version filed on behalf of opposite party No.1 pleaded therein that opposite party is a body corporate established under Section 3 of Life Insurance Corporation of India Act 1956. It is pleaded that complainant does not fall within the definition of consumer. It is pleaded that complainant had purchased the policy qua commercial transaction. It is pleaded that complainant is guilty of suppressio very and suggesstio falsi. It is further pleaded that complainant did not exercise the option to cancel the policy within the cooling period. It is pleaded that amounts are paid to complainant by way of annuity cheques. It is further pleaded that complainant has no cause of action against opposite party No.1. It is pleaded that complicated facts are involved in consumer complaint and complainant be relegated to civil court for adjudication of dispute. Prayer for dismissal of consumer complaint against opposite party No.1 sought.
5. Per contra separate version filed on behalf of opposite party No.2 i.e. UCO bank pleaded therein that opposite party No.2 is corporate agent of opposite party No.1. It is pleaded that consumer complaint is not maintainable and present consumer complaint is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties. It is pleaded that opposite party No.2 has nothing to do with controversy between the complainant and opposite party No.1. It is admitted that opposite party No.2 is 4 Branch Manager Life Insurance Corporation of India Versus Rama Nand Sharma & Anr. F.A. No.140/2018
& Branch Manager UCO Bank Versus Rama Nand Sharma & Anr. F.A. No.208/2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- corporate agent of opposite party No.1. It is further pleaded that opposite party No.2 has only acted as corporate agent of opposite party No.1 and opposite party No.2 has nothing to do with insurance plan of opposite party No.1. It is admitted that complainant was having saving bank account with opposite party No.2. It is pleaded that opposite party No.2 did not involve in unfair trade practice. It is pleaded that complainant has no cause of action against opposite party No.2. Prayer for dismissal of consumer complaint against opposite party No.2 sought.
6. Learned District Forum allowed the complaint and directed opposite party No.1 to pay sum of Rs.60000/- (Sixty thousand) to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of complaint till actual payment. In addition learned District Forum further ordered opposite parties jointly and severally to pay compensation to complainant for mental agony to the tune of Rs.20000/- (Twenty thousand). In addition learned District Forum further ordered opposite parties jointly and severally to pay litigation costs to complainant to the tune of Rs.5000/-(Five thousand) within forty five days from receipt of copy of order. Feeling aggrieved against order passed by learned District Forum Branch Manager Life Insurance Corporation of India filed appeal No.140/2018 and Branch Manager UCO Bank filed appeal No.208/2018 before H.P. State Commission. 5 Branch Manager Life Insurance Corporation of India Versus Rama Nand Sharma & Anr. F.A. No.140/2018
& Branch Manager UCO Bank Versus Rama Nand Sharma & Anr. F.A. No.208/2018
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. We have heard learned Advocates appearing on behalf of parties and we have also perused entire record carefully.
8. Following points arise for determination in present appeals.
1. Whether appeal No.140/2018 is liable to be accepted as mentioned in memorandum of grounds of appeal.
2. Whether appeal No.208/2018 is liable to be accepted as mentioned in memorandum of grounds of appeal.
3. Final order.
Findings upon point No.1 with reasons relating to F.A. No.140/2018 :-_______________________________________
9. Complainant Rama Nand filed affidavit in evidence. There is recital in affidavit that deponent is senior citizen of India aged seventy four years and is rustic villager. There is recital in affidavit that deponent invested amount in UCO bank which was matured in year 2006. There is recital in affidavit that deponent intended to encash amount but opposite party No.2 pursuaded deponent to invest the amount in insurance policy. There is recital in affidavit that on maturity the amount was not released by opposite party No.1 and same was further invested in pension plan unilaterally without the consent of deponent. State Commission has carefully perused all the annexures filed by complainant. 6 Branch Manager Life Insurance Corporation of India Versus Rama Nand Sharma & Anr. F.A. No.140/2018
& Branch Manager UCO Bank Versus Rama Nand Sharma & Anr. F.A. No.208/2018
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. Opposite party No.1 i.e. Life Insurance Corporation of India filed affidavit of Shri N.R. Sharma Manager LIC of India. There is recital in affidavit that complainant does not fall within the definition of consumer as provided under Consumer Protection Act 1986. There is further recital in affidavit that complainant had purchased the policy qua commercial transaction. There is further recital in affidavit that complainant himself signed the proposal form. There is further recital in affidavit that as per terms and conditions of the policy only annuity is payable. There is further recital in affidavit that opposite party No.1 did not commit any deficiency in service. There is further recital in affidavit that policy could not be surrendered after further vestment of policy. There is further recital in affidavit that pension plan is automatic after vestment of policy.
11. Opposite party No.1 also filed affidavit of Sh. Vimlesh Kumar Sr. Divisional Manager posted in Life Insurance Corporation of India. There is recital in affidavit that date of vestment of policy was 09.03.2011. There is recital in affidavit that insurance policy could not be surrendered after vestment of policy. There is recital in affidavit that complainant is only entitled for annuity. There is recital in affidavit that commuted value to the tune of Rs.35000/-(Thirty five thousand) was paid to complainant on 07.06.2012. There is recital in affidavit that complainant has 7 Branch Manager Life Insurance Corporation of India Versus Rama Nand Sharma & Anr. F.A. No.140/2018
& Branch Manager UCO Bank Versus Rama Nand Sharma & Anr. F.A. No.208/2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- already received commuted value. There is recital in affidavit that opposite party did not commit any deficiency in service.
12. Opposite party No.2 filed affidavit of Sh. Vikas Sharma Manager UCO Bank. There is recital in affidavit that opposite party No.2 is corporate agent of opposite party No.1. There is recital in affidavit that insurance policy was issued by opposite party No.1 and dispute is between opposite party No.1 and complainant. There is recital in affidavit that opposite party No.2 is not insurer. There is recital in affidavit that complainant has no cause of action against opposite party No.2. State Commission has carefully perused all the annexures filed by opposite party No.2 carefully.
13. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of Manager Life Insurance Corporation of India that amount to the tune of Rs.113203/-(One lac thirteen thousand two hundred three) already stood paid to complainant and on this ground appeal filed by LIC be allowed is decided accordingly. Life Insurance Corporation of India has specifically mentioned in memorandum of appeal that LIC has paid following amounts to complainant:-
i) Commuted valid paid on 07.06.2012 = 35000
ii) Surrender Value paid on 19.05.2014 = 58546
iii) Annuity paid in monthly installment
w.e.f. March 2011 to 2014 = 19657
_________________________________________________________ Total = 113203.00 _________________________________________________________ 8 Branch Manager Life Insurance Corporation of India Versus Rama Nand Sharma & Anr. F.A. No.140/2018
& Branch Manager UCO Bank Versus Rama Nand Sharma & Anr. F.A. No.208/2018
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. State Commission is of the opinion that after payment of amount to the tune of Rs.113203/-(One lac thirteen thousand two hundred three) to complainant by Life Insurance Corporation of India cause of action relating to payment of principal amount qua insurance policy comes to an end. Complainant did not refute the fact that he did not receive an amount of Rs.113203/-(One lac thirteen thousand two hundred three) from insurance company. Life Insurance Corporation of India has paid alleged amount after institution of consumer complaint. Consumer complaint was filed on 18.06.2012. State Commission is of the opinion that in view of above stated facts it is expedient in the ends of justice and on the principle of natural justice to exonerate LIC of India from payment of principal amount ordered by learned District Forum to the tune of Rs.60000/-(Sixty thousand) alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of complaint till actual payment.
15. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of Manager Life Insurance Corporation of India that learned District Forum has granted excessive compensation to complainant to the tune of Rs.20000/-(Twenty thousand) on account of mental agony and harassment and on this ground appeal filed by LIC be allowed is decided accordingly. It is proved on record that LIC of India has paid the surrender 9 Branch Manager Life Insurance Corporation of India Versus Rama Nand Sharma & Anr. F.A. No.140/2018
& Branch Manager UCO Bank Versus Rama Nand Sharma & Anr. F.A. No.208/2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- policy amount to the tune of Rs.58546/-(Fifty eight thousand five hundred forty six) on dated 19.05.2014 during pendency of consumer complaint and has also paid annuity amounts w.e.f. March 2011 to March 2014 to the tune of Rs.19657/- (Nineteen thousand six hundred fifty seven) during the pendency of consumer complaint. Complainant who is senior citizen of India aged seventy four years has sustained mental agony and complainant was forced to file consumer complaint against opposite parties in the month of June 2012. Hence it is held that learned District Forum has granted reasonable compensation to complainant.
16. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of Manager LIC of India that learned District Forum has granted excessive litigation costs to complainant to the tune of Rs.5000/-(Five thousand) is decided accordingly. State Commission is of the opinion that opposite party No.1 had paid surrender value on dated 19.05.2014 and has also paid annuity amount to the tune of Rs.19657/-(Nineteen thousand six hundred fifty seven) during lis pendens of consumer complaint. Complainant was forced to file consumer complaint and was forced to engage Advocate and was forced to pay litigation fee. In view of above stated facts it is held that learned District Forum has granted reasonable litigation costs to complainant.
10 Branch Manager Life Insurance Corporation of India Versus Rama Nand Sharma & Anr. F.A. No.140/2018
& Branch Manager UCO Bank Versus Rama Nand Sharma & Anr. F.A. No.208/2018
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of Life Insurance Corporation that insurance policy was obtained for commercial purpose and on this ground appeal be allowed is decided accordingly. State Commission is of the opinion that under section 2(o) of Consumer Protection Act 1986 matters of all description relating to Insurance policy falls within domain of section 2(o) of Consumer Protection Act 1986.
18. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of Life Insurance Corporation that complicated facts and laws are involved and complainant be relegated to civil court for adjudication of dispute is decided accordingly. State Commission is of the opinion that complainant is senior citizen of India aged more than seventy four years and it is not expedient in the ends of justice and on the principles of natural justice to relegate complainant to civil court for adjudication of dispute.
19. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of complainant that order of learned District Forum is in accordance with laws and is in accordance with proved facts is decided accordingly. State Commission is of the opinion that in view of fact that Life Insurance Corporation of India had paid surrender value amount on 19.05.2014 to the tune of Rs.58546/-(Fifty eight thousand five hundred forty six) and LIC has also paid annuity amount w.e.f. 2011 to 11 Branch Manager Life Insurance Corporation of India Versus Rama Nand Sharma & Anr. F.A. No.140/2018
& Branch Manager UCO Bank Versus Rama Nand Sharma & Anr. F.A. No.208/2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2014 to the tune of Rs.19657/-(Nineteen thousand six hundred fifty seven) to complainant it is expedient in the ends of justice and on the principle of natural justice to adjust above stated amount. In view of above stated facts point No.1 is answered accordingly.
Findings upon point No.2 with reasons relating to F.A. No.208/2018 :-___________________________________________
20. Evidence is not repeated again in order to avoid repetition. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of Manager UCO bank that UCO bank is only corporate agent of LIC of India and insurance policy was executed inter-
-se LIC and complainant and on this ground appeal filed by Manager UCO bank be allowed is decided accordingly. It is proved on record that complainant was saving account holder in UCO bank. It is also proved on record that UCO bank who is corporate agent of LIC of India pursuaded complainant to invest in insurance policy. State Commission is of the opinion that it is not expedient in the ends of justice and on the principle of natural justice to exonerate UCO bank who is corporate agent of LIC of India from liability. State Commission is of the opinion that there was nexus between opposite party No.2 and opposite party No.1 being corporate agent.
21. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of complainant that order of learned District Forum 12 Branch Manager Life Insurance Corporation of India Versus Rama Nand Sharma & Anr. F.A. No.140/2018
& Branch Manager UCO Bank Versus Rama Nand Sharma & Anr. F.A. No.208/2018
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- does not warrant interference by State Commission qua appeal filed by Branch Manager UCO Bank is decided accordingly. State Commission is of the opinion that order of learned District Forum qua Branch Manager UCO Bank does not warrant interference by State Commission qua grant of compensation amount for mental agony and harassment and qua litigation costs because Branch Manager UCO Bank has acted as corporate agent of LIC and pursuaded complainant to invest in LIC policy. Point No.2 is decided accordingly. Point No.3 : Final Order
22. In view of findings upon points No.1 & 2 F.A. No.140/2018 titled Branch Manager LIC Versus Rama Nand & Anr. is partly allowed. F.A. No.208/2018 titled Branch Manager UCO Bank Versus Rama Nand & Anr. is dismissed. Order of learned District Forum that opposite party No.1 i.e. LIC would pay an amount of Rs.60000/-(Sixty thousand) to complainant alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of complaint till actual payment is set aside. LIC will file affidavit before learned District Forum to the effect that amount to the tune of Rs.113203/-(One lac thirteen thousand two hundred three) already stood paid to complainant and stood credited in payee account within one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of order of State Commission.
13 Branch Manager Life Insurance Corporation of India Versus Rama Nand Sharma & Anr. F.A. No.140/2018
& Branch Manager UCO Bank Versus Rama Nand Sharma & Anr. F.A. No.208/2018
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
23. Order of learned District Forum that opposite parties would jointly and severally pay compensation to complainant for mental agony and harassment to the tune of Rs.20000/-(Twenty thousand) is affirmed. Order of learned District Forum that opposite parties would jointly and severally pay litigation costs to the tune of Rs.5000/-(Five thousand) is also affirmed. Order of learned District Forum is modified accordingly. Order passed in the ends of justice and on the principle of natural justice keeping in view fact that complainant is senior citizen of India aged seventy four years.
24. Certified copy of order be placed in the file of F.A. No.208/2018 forthwith. Parties are left to bear their own litigation costs before State Commission. File of learned District Forum alongwith certified copy of order be sent back forthwith and file of State Commission be consigned to record room after due completion forthwith. Certified copy of order be transmitted to parties forthwith free of costs strictly as per rules. Both Appeals i.e. F.A. No.140/2018 & F.A. No.208/2018 are disposed of. Pending application(s) if any also disposed of.
Justice P.S. Rana (R)
President
08.08.2019 Sunita Sharma
K.D* Member
14