Azad Singh vs United Commercial Bank (Uco) on 22 August, 2023

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Central Information Commission

Azad Singh vs United Commercial Bank (Uco) on 22 August, 2023

1. The issue under consideration arising out of the second appeal dated 23.03.2022 include non-receipt of the following information sought by the appellant through the RTI application dated 02.07.2021 and first appeal dated 03.12.2021:-

(i) Whether the said loan account (Griha Laxmi Yojana (no. 211589) has been covered under any Home Loan Borrowers Policy or Term Insurance., if, yes, please provide" the details and copies or copy of the said policy or policies taken till date?

(ii) Whether the Term Insurance is still valid or has been abandoned.

(iii) What amount has been charged for the said insurance policy and till what period it has been renewed?

(iv) Whether any information has been provided to the insurer for the said policy? (v) Whether LIC Policy-UCO GrihaLaxmiYojana (no. 211589) is still Page 1 of 4 continuing or not? If yes then provide the copy of the said policy also? If not then why same was discontinue? Provide the copy of the said expired policy also.

(vi) What is the current total outstanding and what amount is being deducted for the term insurance? Till date?

2. Succinctly facts of the case are that the appellant filed an application dated 02.07.2021 under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act) before the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO), UCO Bank, New Delhi. The CPIO vide letter dated 18.11.2021 replied to the appellant. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed first appeal dated 03.12.2021. The First Appellate Authority(FAA) vide order dated 23.12.2021 disposed of the first appeal. Aggrieved by that, the appellant filed second appeal dated 27.01.2021 before the Commission which is under consideration.

3. The appellant has filed the instant appeal dated 27.01.2021 inter alia on the grounds that reply given by the CPIO was not satisfactory. The appellant requested the Commission to direct the CPIO to provide the complete information and take necessary action as per Section 20 (1) of the RTI Act.

4. The CPIO replied vide letter dated 18.11.2021 and the same is reproduced as under:-

(i) Yes, said loan account has been covered under UCO Griha Lakshmi Yojna-

211589. We are enclosing the documents available with branch related to your policy.

      (ii)     Insurance is valid upto the age of 65 years.
      (iii)    One time charge for an amount of Rs one lakh ten thousand (110000)
charged        for insurance till age 65 years.
      (iv)     Yes, all information given to the insurer proper sign taken on application

for membership of UCO Griha Lakshmi Yojna Scheme.

(v) Yes, the policy of UCO Griha Lakshmi Yojna taken is still valid. Though we have submitted al the papers along with requisite one time insurance premium to LIC but till date we yet to receive the policy from LIC. We are enclosing the correspondence of our DrMukhergee Nagar Branch with LIC of India P & G Scheme Department, JEEV PRAKSH BUILDING on various dated.

Page 2 of 4

(vi) Current outstanding amount is Rs 21,16,733/- and Rs 1,10,000/- deducted for the Term insurance till date.

The FAA vide order dated 23.12.2021concurred with the reply given by the CPIO.

5. The appellant and on behalf of the respondent Shri Amit Bhardwaj, Assistant General Manager and CPIO and Shri Manish Verma, Assistant Manager(Law), UCO Bank, Delhi, attended the hearing in person.

5.1. The appellant inter alia submitted that he had availed a loan of Rs. 39 lakhs from the respondent bank with an insurance of Rs. 1.1 lakhs. He alleged that although the respondent bank had debited the amount of loan insurance from his account, he was not provided with a copy of the insurance cover note or any other documentary proof in support of the insurance cover of his loan. He contended that the bank had a tie-up with the insurance company i.e. LIC and claimed that they had not received the insurance bond from LIC.

5.2. The respondent while defending their case inter alia submitted that they had sent an application along with relevant loan documents of the appellant's loan account seeking the cover bond/note. However, the LIC Company had not provided them with a copy of the insurance bond documents, till the date of hearing. Therefore, they were unable to provide the same to the appellant.

6. The Commission after adverting to the facts and circumstances of the case, hearing both the parties and perusal of records, observed that the reply given by the respondent was perfunctory. The respondent claimed that the LIC policy document was not under their custody and they had sent written communication to the LIC seeking copy of cover note. It may be noted that the insurance pertained to the loan provided by the bank and, therefore, the respondent may not shift its responsibility to an intermediary agent on the ground that the LIC company was not providing them with the requisite documents. In case the respondent bank was availing insurance services from a third party/company, the onus of providing the documents to the customers was with the bank and they could have procured the same from LIC company. The appellant claimed that there was a lapse of around 11 years and the respondent had not provided the information, till the date of hearing. The delay in furnishing the information and lapse on the part of the respondent Page 3 of 4 to procure the documents from LIC, is viewed seriously. In view of the above, the respondent is directed to re-visit the RTI application and update the status of validity of the appellant's LIC bond and provide certified copy of the insurance bond to the appellant, within three weeks from the date of receipt of this order. With these observations and directions, the appeal is disposed of.

Copy of the decision be provided free of cost to the parties.

Sd/-

(Suresh Chandra) (सुसुरेशचं ा) ा सूचनाआयु ) Information Commissioner (सू दनांक/Date: 22.08.2023 Authenticated true copy R. Sitarama Murthy (आर. सीताराममूत#) Dy. Registrar (उपपंजीयक) 011-26181927(०११-२६१८१९२७) Addresses of the parties:

The CPIO UCO Bank, Zonal Office, 5 Parliament Street New Delhi - 110001 First Appellate Authority UCO Bank, Zonal Office, 5 Parliament Street, New Delhi - 110001 Shri Azad Singh, Page 4 of 4

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Information Commission