State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
The Branch Manager, vs Roopwati W/O. Shivajirao Dahvalshankh on 11 August, 2010
1 F.A. No..: 509-08
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
MUMBAI, CIRCUIT BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
Date of filing : 11.04.2008
Date of Order: 11.08.2010
FIRST APPEAL NO. 509 OF 2008
IN COMPLAINT CASE NO. 208 OF 2007
DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM: LATUR.
1. The Branch Manager,
Life Insurance Corporation of India Ltd.,
Ambajogai Road, Dist. Latur.
2. Manager ( L & HPF)
LIC of India, through
Prakash s/o. Laxman Kulkarni,
R/o. LIC Quarters, Adalat Road, Aurangabad. ... Appellants
VERSUS
1. Roopwati w/o. Shivajirao Dahvalshankh
R/o. Shrinagar Colony, Bidar Road,
Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur.
2. Principal,
Maharashtra Udaygiri College, Udgir,
Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur. ... Respondents
Coram : Shri.S.G.Deshmukh, Hon`ble Judicial Member.
Mrs. Uma S.Bora, Hon`ble Member.
Present: Adv. Shri. N.V. Mande, for appellant.
Adv. Shri. K.G. Deshpande, for respondent.
2 F.A. No..: 509-08:: ORAL ORDER ::
Per Smt. Uma S. Bora, Hon`ble Member
1. Life Insurance Corporation of India through Branch Manager, Latur and Manager at Aurangabad challenges in this appeal order passed by District Consumer Forum, Latur in complaint case No. 208/2007 decided on 29.02.2008. Complainant/Respondent No.1 is wife of life assured and Respondent No.2 is institution where life assured was serving.
2. Facts of the complaint are as under :
Complainant Rupwati Shivajirao Dhawalshankh is widow of Professor, Shivajirao Dhawalshankh. The deceased was serving as professor in Maharashtra Udaygiri College at Udgir Dist. Latur. For employees of said institute group salary linking insurance was obtained by the LIC. Said policy is under salary saving scheme. According to said scheme is to be deducted from monthly salary of each employee and is to be remitted with LIC upto 20 th of every month. Said policy was for Rs. 2,00,000/-. Life assured Shivajirao Dhawalshankh died in road accident on 03.04.2004 therefore complainant preferred the claim with the appellant. It was informed by appellant to the complainant by letter dated 04.02.2005 that less premium was received on delayed date therefore, policy is in lapsed condition. After many communications with the appellant Rs. 2,00,000/- as sum insured and Rs. 21,907/- as interest were sanctioned on ex-gratia basis and paid to the complainant
3. As the Life assured died due to accidental death accident benefits were claimed by the complainant. Since 16.04.2004 to 01.07.2007 complainant made written communication with the LIC. By letter dated 13.07.2007 LIC refused to pay accident benefits. Therefore, complainant 3 F.A. No..: 509-08 approached to District Forum and demanded accident benefit with the interest @ 12 % p.a.
4. Appellant appeared before the Forum and denied the claim. It is submitted that as per terms and conditions of the insurance policy, policy was in lapsed condition and therefore complainant is not entitled to receive the accident benefits.
5. After hearing both the parties District Forum allowed the complaint and directed appellant to pay Rs.2,00,000/- with the interest @ 9 % p.a.
6. Dissatisfied with the said judgment and order LIC came in appeal.
7. Notices were issued to both the parties. Adv. Shri. N.V. Mande, appeared for appellant and Adv. Shri. K.G. Deshpande, appeared for respondent. It is submitted by Adv. Deshpande that life assured was employee of Respondent No.2. As per the terms and conditions of the policy premium for every month has to be remitted with LIC upto 20 th of every month. But, last premium of Feb.2004 was not remitted upto 20 th February but, it was received by LIC on 12.03.2004. As the premium was received late policy was in lapsed condition. Therefore, complainant was not entitled to receive the policy amount. But the policy claim of the complainant was considered on humanitarian ground as sum assured was paid to the complainant on ex-gratia basis. Complainant is not entitled to receive the accident benefits as policy was in lapsed condition.
8. Adv. P.G. Deshpande submitted that the policy is under salary saving scheme. Premium was to be paid by employer by deducting from salary of the employee. Therefore, life assured was not aware about the remittance of the premium. It is further submitted that though premium was paid after due date LIC used to charge the interest on said amount.4 F.A. No..: 509-08
Therefore it can not be said that premium can not be paid after 20 th of every month. He relied on various judgments of State Commission-
i) In LIC of India Vs. Gulab Devi - IV 2007 CPJ 375. It is held by State Commission - Premium for two installments along with late fees accepted by Insurance Company on 19.01.2002- Issuance of Renewal Premium Receipt sufficient to indicate acceptance of request for revival of policy - Insured died on 25.1.2002 -Insurance Company liable under policy.
ii) In Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. Smt. Savithramma & Anr., III (1999) CPJ 353. Policy in lapsed condition - Premium paid after death of insured - Claim repudiated - Insured died on 10.09.1994 - Premium accepted on 13.09.1994 - Imperative on part of L.I.C. to bring it to the notice of insured that premium not paid - Deficiency in service established - L.I.C. liable to make the payment along with interest.
iii) In Life Insurance Corporation Anr. Vs. Kuldeep Kaur, IV (2007) CPJ 335. Double accident benefit - Policy lapsed - Revived on 3.4.2001 - Insured met with accident on 1.4.2001 - Died on 4.4.2001
- Basic sum assured along with bonus paid - Double accident benefit denied - Contention, policy revived after accident, double accident benefit not payable - Contention not acceptable - Ambiguity in policy terms, should be construed in favour of insured - Death due to injuries suffered in accident - Complaint allowed.
9. We heard the arguments of both the counsels and perused the record. It is an admitted fact that life assured obtained the policy under G.S.L. Said policy is under salary saving scheme. Life assured was working with Respondent No.2 Maharashtra Udaygiri College. Said college is an implied authority to collect the premium for LIC. We 5 F.A. No..: 509-08 perused the terms and conditions of G.S.L.'s scheme. According to said scheme employer is to remit the premium of every month with LIC before 20th day of every month. Employer is to remit the premium though salary was not payable to the employee. Information about terminations of membership, retirement of member or death of member is to be furnished by employer to the LIC. It is also mentioned in the said terms if the premium is receive after 20 th day of month interest at 12 % p.a. will be charged on said amount. It can be said from the said terms and conditions that employer is responsible for sending the premiums within time. It is also seen from said term that, premium can be sent after due date but interest also has to be paid. It is mentioned in the terms that if the premium is not received within time there will be difficult in deciding the policy claim. It is nowhere mentioned that if premium is not received policy will be lapsed. I the case in hand premium was paid on 12.04.2003 and it was accepted by LIC with interest therefore, it can not be said that policy was in lapsed condition. It is also an admitted fact the life assured died due to accident while was in service. We are relying on the well-known authority Delhi Electric Supply Undertaking Vs. Basanti Devi & Anr., 1999 (3) CPR 91 (SC). It is held by Apex Court, agreement with employer and LIC premium payable by employer to be deducted every month from salary of employee and to be transmitted to the LIC - No communication from the LIC to the employee that employer was not its agent - authority of employer to collect premium on behalf of LIC - employee not knowing what was arrangement between employer and LIC though it could be said that employer was agent of LIC for employee. In the instant case, employer was to deduct the premium and remit to the LIC. Life assured was in service. Therefore, his salary was payable therefore employer is under obligation to remit the premiums every month regularly and within time. It is also an admitted fact that though premiums were paid at 6 F.A. No..: 509-08 late stage interest can be charged. In the instant case also premium was received lately by LIC and interest was charged on the same. Forum has rightly considered all these aspects and rightly allowed the complaint. We are not inclined to interfere the judgment and order passed by the Forum.
O R D E R
1. Appeal is dismissed.
2. Appellant is directed to pay Rs.2,000/- as cost of this appeal to the complainant.
3. Copy of the order be furnished to the parties.
(Mrs.Uma S. Bora) (S. G. Deshmukh)
Member Presiding Judicial Member
Kalyankar