State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Smt. Nirmala Devi vs H.P. State Cooperative Bank Ltd. & Anr. on 12 December, 2024
H. P. ST AT E CONSUMER D ISPUTES REDRESS AL
CO MMISSION SHIML A.
First Appeal No. : 164/2023
Date of Presentation : 24.07.2023
Order Reserved on : 10.12.2024
Date of Order : 12.12.2024
_____
Smt. Nirmla Devi W/o late Sh. Kashmiri Lal Resident of
Village Obru, Post Office Halog (Dhami), Sub-Tehsil Dhami,
Tehsil and District Shimla, H.P.
...... Appellant/Complainant.
Versus
1. The Himachal Pradesh State Cooperative Bank Limited,
The Mall, Shimla, H.P. through its Manager.
2. The New India Assurance Company Limited, SDA
Complex, Kasumpti, Shimla-9, through its Sr. Divisional
Manager.
....Respondents/ Opposite parties.
Coram
Hon'ble Justice Inder Singh Mehta, President
Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes
For the Appellant: Mr.Manoj Sharma, Advocate vice
Mr.Peeyush Verma, Advocate.
For respondent No.1: Mr. Jagat Singh Shyam, Advocate.
1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the order?
Smt. Nirmla Devi Vs. The H.P.State Cooperative Bank Ltd. & Anr.
(F.A. No.164/2023)
For respondent No.2: Mr. Raman Sethi, Advocate.
Justice, Inder Singh Mehta, President
ORDER
Instant appeal is arising out of the order dated 26.06.2023 passed by Learned District Consumer Commission, Shimla, H.P. in Consumer Complaint No.307/2015 titled Smt. Nirmla Devi Versus The Himachal Pradesh State Cooperative Bank Ltd. & Anr. Brief facts of Case:
2. Brief facts of the case are that husband of the complainant Sh.Kashmiri Lal (now deceased) was government employee of the H.P. State Electricity Board and was having his salary account bearing No. 4380123221 with the opposite party No.1/ H.P. State Cooperative Bank Ltd. In the said account, complainant Smt. Nirmla Devi was nominee. Husband of the complainant Sh.Kashimiri Lal during his life time enrolled himself under a scheme i.e. Pradhan Mantri Suraksha Bima Yojna (PMSBY) on 2 Smt. Nirmla Devi Vs. The H.P.State Cooperative Bank Ltd. & Anr.
(F.A. No.164/2023) 08.05.2015 vide policy bearing No. 35140042150100000006 with the opposite party No.2/Insurance company and premium of Rs.12/- was paid on 30.05.2015 from the his aforesaid salary account. On 30.05.2015, Sh. Kashmiri Lal unfortunately died in a road accident. The complainant submitted claim alongwith all requisite documents to the opposite party No.1/Bank. However, the opposite parties rejected the claim of the complainant vide intimation letter dated 26.08.2015 on the ground that insured died on 30.05.2015, whereas the insurance under the PMSBY scheme was to commence w.e.f. 01.06.2015. There is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties. Hence, the present complaint.
3. The complaint was contested by the opposite party No.1/Bank and stated that late Sh. Kashmiri Lal was having saving bank account with the replying opposite party No.1/Bank and he had enrolled himself on 08.05.2015 under PMBSY Scheme. The role of the bank is limited to 3 Smt. Nirmla Devi Vs. The H.P.State Cooperative Bank Ltd. & Anr.
(F.A. No.164/2023) submission of enrolment and to deduct amount of premium through auto debit facility in one installment on or before 1st June of each annual coverage period. The premium amount of Rs.12/- was deducted on 30.05.2015. The scheme was to commence from 01.06.2015, whereas as per the record Sh.Kashmiri Lal died on 30.05.2015. The claim of the complainant was submitted to the opposite party No.2/ Insurance company and the claim, if any, is to be settled by the insurance company. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the bank. A prayer for dismissal of complaint against opposite party No.1/Bank was made.
4. The opposite party No.2/Insurance company also contested the complaint by filing reply and stated that coverage of PMBSY Scheme was from 1st June, 2015 to 31st May, 2016 for those who pay/join the requisite amount of premium of Rs.12/- to bank by 31st May of the first year. The life/assured Kashmiri Lal died on 30.05.2015 in a road accident. The policy and the PMBSY scheme clearly shows 4 Smt. Nirmla Devi Vs. The H.P.State Cooperative Bank Ltd. & Anr.
(F.A. No.164/2023) that risk coverage to be between 01.06.2015 to 31.05.2016. There is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the insurance company. Hence, prayer for dismissal of complaint was made.
5. The parties adduced evidence in support of their respective pleadings.
6. After hearing the learned counsel of the parties, learned District Commission below dismissed the complaint of the complainant.
7. Feeling aggrieved by the order of learned District Commission, the appellant/complainant preferred the instant appeal before this Commission.
8. Arguments heard on behalf of the parties and perused the record of the case file carefully.
9. Learned counsel of the appellant/complainant has submitted that deceased husband of complainant had taken a policy and premium amount had already been deducted from the account of deceased husband of complainant. However, 5 Smt. Nirmla Devi Vs. The H.P.State Cooperative Bank Ltd. & Anr.
(F.A. No.164/2023) policy was to commence from 01.06.2015, whereas the husband of deceased died one day prior to commencement of policy i.e. on 30.05.2015. Learned counsel for appellant/complainant has further submitted that policy should have been presumed to be commenced from the date of the depositing of premium amount. He further submitted that impugned order is bad in law and same is required to be set aside. He prays that appeal of the appellant be allowed. He has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case titled Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Dharam Chand & Ors. Civil Appeal No.5404 of 2003 decided on 27.08.2010 and judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Orissa at Cuttack in case titled as Smt. Renuka Sethi and Others Vs. Babu Sahu and Another FAO No.480 of 2012 decided on 01.02.2023.
10. On the other hand, learned counsel of the respondent No.2/insurance company has submitted that the policy in question was to be commenced from 1st June, 2015, 6 Smt. Nirmla Devi Vs. The H.P.State Cooperative Bank Ltd. & Anr.
(F.A. No.164/2023) but the police was never came into existence due to death of deceased life assured Kashmiri Lal (husband of complainant). However, the premium amount of Rs.12/- had already deducted from the account of deceased life assured Kashmiri Lal and was received by the insurance company, which fact is not denied by the insurance company. He prays that impugned order does not require any interference and prays that appeal of the appellant/complainant be dismissed.
11. Learned counsel of respondent No.1/Bank has submitted that deceased life assured Kashmiri Lal (husband of complainant) was having his account with the respondent No.1/Bank and deceased life assured enrolled himself in a policy and premium of Rs.12/- was deducted from the account of deceased/life assured, but life assured died on 30.05.2015 before commencement of policy in question. He further submitted that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the Bank and prays that appeal of the appellant/ complainant be dismissed.
7
Smt. Nirmla Devi Vs. The H.P.State Cooperative Bank Ltd. & Anr.
(F.A. No.164/2023) FINDINGS
12. There is an undisputed fact emerging on record that husband of complainant Sh.Kashmiri Lal (now deceased) was government employee of the H.P. State Electricity Board and was having his salary account bearing No.4380123221 with the opposite party No.1/H.P. State Cooperative Bank Ltd. and in the said account, the complainant Smt. Nirmla Devi was nominee.
13. It is further an admitted fact emerging on record that husband of the complainant Sh. Kashmiri Lal during his life time enrolled himself under a scheme i.e. Pradhan Mantri Suraksha Bima Yojna (PMSBY) on 08.05.2015 vide policy bearing No. 35140042150100000006 with the opposite party No.2/Insurance company and premium of Rs.12/- was deducted on 30.05.2015 from his aforesaid salary account.
14. It is also an undisputed fact emerging on record that on 30.05.2015, Sh. Kashmiri Lal unfortunately died in a 8 Smt. Nirmla Devi Vs. The H.P.State Cooperative Bank Ltd. & Anr.
(F.A. No.164/2023) road accident. The claim alongwith documents were submitted to the opposite parties.
15. The opposite party No.2/insurance company rejected the claim of the complainant on the ground that insured died on 30.05.2015, whereas the insurance company under the PMBSY scheme was to commence from 01.06.2015.
16. Perusal of the insurance policy, Annexure R-1 placed on record by the insurance company clearly indicates that period of insurance is from 01.06.2015 to 31.05.2016.
17. The insurance company has also placed on record the rules framed under the PMSBY Scheme. Perusal of the said rules indicates that scheme was launched for all saving bank account holders in the age of 18 to 70 years and the scheme was for a period of one year commencing from 01.06.2015 to 31.05.2016.
18. Thus, it is crystal clear from the insurance policy, Annexure R-1 as well as the rules framed under the PMSBY 9 Smt. Nirmla Devi Vs. The H.P.State Cooperative Bank Ltd. & Anr.
(F.A. No.164/2023) Scheme that scheme was to commence from 01.06.2015 and coverage of risk was to be effective from 01.06.2015.
19. Since husband of the complainant died in road accident on 30.05.2015 and the policy in question was to commence from 01.06.2015, the accidental death of husband of the complainant was not covered under the PMBSY scheme in question.
20. As far as the judgments relied upon by the appellant/complainant are concerned, same are not applicable in the facts and circumstances of the present case.
21. It is coming on record that premium amount of Rs.12/- paid by the husband of the complainant has not been refunded back to the complainant. Once the claim of the complainant was rejected by the insurance company, the insurance company is under legal obligation to refund back the said premium amount to the complainant.
22. In view of the above stated facts, appeal of the appellant/complainant is partly allowed and the impugned 10 Smt. Nirmla Devi Vs. The H.P.State Cooperative Bank Ltd. & Anr.
(F.A. No.164/2023) order is set aside. The opposite party No.2/Insurance company is directed to refund the premium amount of Rs.12/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of deposit i.e. 30.05.2015 till realization of the aforesaid amount.
23. The opposite party No.2/Insurance company is further directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) as compensation to the complainant, beside litigation costs to the tune of Rs.5,000/- (Five thousand).
24. The opposite party No.2/Insurance company is directed to comply the aforesaid order within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
25. Certified copy of order be sent to the parties and their counsel(s) strictly as per rules. File of learned District Commission along with certified copy of order be sent back and file of State Commission be consigned to record room 11 Smt. Nirmla Devi Vs. The H.P.State Cooperative Bank Ltd. & Anr.
(F.A. No.164/2023) after due completion. Appeal is disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, also disposed of.
Justice Inder Singh Mehta President Manoj 12