State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Divisional Manager, Life Insurance ... vs Smt. Alo Biswas, Wife Of Late Sushil ... on 13 June, 2010
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION:ORISSA:CUTTACK STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION:ORISSA: CUTTACK FIRST APPEAL NO.60 OF 2006 From an order dated 07.11.2005 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Nabarangpur in C.D. Case No.25 of 2005. 1. Divisional Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India, Berhampur Division, Berhampur, Dist. Ganjam 2. Branch Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India, Nabarangpur Branch, Dist. Nabarangpur . Appellants -Versus- 1. Smt. Alo Biswas, wife of late Sushil Kumar Biswas, At/P.O. Martuma, via. Umerkote U.V. No.6, Dist. Nabarangpur . Respondents For the Appellant - Mr. R.K. Pattnaik & Associates For Respondents - Mr. R.K. Sahoo & Associates(R-2) P R E S E N T : THE HONBLE SHRI JUSTICE A.K. SAMANTARAY, PRESIDENT, AND SHRIMATI SMARITA M0HANTY, MEMBER O R D E R
DATE:- The June, 2010.
Justice A.K. Samantaray, President.
This is an appeal by the Divisional Manager, LIC of India, Berhampur, and Branch Manager, LIC of India, Nabarangpur Branch challenging the judgment and order dated 07.11.2005 passed by the District Forum, Nabarangpur in C.D. Case No.25 of 2005, whereby the District Forum has directed the appellants, who were the opposite parties before it, to pay the assured amount of both the policies to the complainant-respondent Smt. Alo Biswas along with compensation of Rs.5,000/- and litigation cost of Rs.2,000/- within two months from the date of the order, failing which the amounts would carry interest at the rate of 12% per annum.
2. The case of the complainant-respondent Alo Biswas is that she is the wife of late Sushil Kumar Biswas, who was working as a Peon in the Government High School at Turhudi and expired on 17.10.2004 at Government Hospital, Jeypore. During his life time, he had taken two policies, i.e., Policy No.571317623 for Rs.40,000/- and Policy No.571317574 for Rs.30,000/-. In the said policies, he had made his mother Kanakalata Biswas as his nominee. It is her case that on her protest on 27.06.2004 and under pressure of the village Sarpanch and local gentlemen, the husband of the complainant made a testamentary succession note in her favour. After his death, the complainant made claim for the sums assured under the aforesaid policies before the LIC authorities at Nabarangpur. But the concerned Branch Manager expressed his inability to pay her the assured amounts in his letter dated 01.02.2005. Again she made claim before the Divisional Manager of the Corporation at Berhampur sending a FAX message, but no action was taken on the said message. The complainant being a poor widow having no issue, there is no other person to look after her. She is aged about 28 years having an uncertain future. In such situation, she made a prayer to the District Forum by filing the consumer dispute for a direction to the opposite parties to hand over the assured amounts under the policies, i.e., Rs.l70,000/- with interest to her. For the harassment caused by the opposite parties, she claimed another sum of Rs.60,000/- and also claimed Rs.2,000/- towards cost of litigation with 12% interest on the amounts.
3. Both the appellants, who were opposite parties 1 and 2 before the District Forum, entered appearance and filed written version wherein it was averred that the life of the deceased Sushil Kumar Biswas was insured under the aforesaid two policies, which commenced on 28.11.2003 and 11.12.2003 respectively. Under both the policies, Kanakalata Biswas, the mother of the life assured, was the nominee and there was no mention of the name of the complainant Alo Biswas. The Life Insurance Corporation is bound to honour the name as proposed by the insured and under no circumstance it can consider the relationship of the complainant with the deceased life assured. This fact the appellants-opposite parties had intimated in their letter dated 01.02.2005 so that the complainant could understand the situation. As regards the premium of the said policies, it was stated that in respect of Policy No.571317623, the premium was paid up to May, 2004, and in respect of the other policy the premium was paid up to June, 2004. The policy holder expired on 17.10.2004 and by that time the policies had already lapsed and as such the opposite parties are not bound to entertain the claim. However, it is admitted in the written version that the policies were under salary saving scheme and the employer of the life assured was the Headmaster of the Government High School, Turhudi.4. Opposite party no.4, the Headmaster of the Government High School, who was the employer and was drawing the salary of the life assured, filed his written version stating that he has submitted the LIC premium remittance particulars of both the policies and the leave particulars of the life assured deceased Sushil Kumar Biswas, Peon of the School, who expired on 17.10.2004.
Opposite party no.3, the mother and nominee of the deceased policy holder, neither appeared before the District Forum in response to the notice nor filed any written version or document.
4. The learned District Forum, after perusal of the documents filed and after hearing the learned counsel for the parties directed the appellants-opposite parties 1 and 2 in the manner as already quoted hereinbefore.
5. Mr. R.K. Pattnaik, learned counsel appearing for the appellants LIC submitted that in the proposal form the deceased life assured Sushil Kumar Biswal had nominated his mother Kanakalata Biswas-opposite party no.3 as nominee, and since during his life time he did not change the nominee, the Insurance Corporation could not have paid the sum assured to the complainant-respondent Alo Biswas, who claiming to the wife of the life assured demanded payment of the assured amount to her. He drew our attention to the document relying on which the District Forum has passed the impugned order, and that is nothing but a testamentary succession note said to have been signed by late Sushil Kumar Biswas, which is an unregistered document on a stamp paper. If at all such a document was executed, no intimation was sent to the LIC, who remained in dark about any other claimant than the nominee. If opposite party no.3, the mother-nominee of the life assured, would have appeared in the consumer dispute before the District Forum, Nabarangpur, the matter could have been sorted out, but for reasons best known to her, she stayed away from the Forum, and it is submitted that she filed another consumer complaint bearing number 41 of 2006 claiming the assured amount as the nominee of her deceased son in her individual capacity.
6. It is very much evident from the aforesaid factual background that for the self-same assured amount there are two claimants one is the present respondent who was the complainant before the District Forum, and the other, the actual nominee (mother) Kanakalata Biswas. The District Forum, as is pointed out, has relied on the unregistered testamentary succession note said to have been executed by the life assured during his life time. As it appears, it was made some time in the month of June, 2004, and the life assured expired in October, 2004. Since the appellants-opposite parties were not intimated about any change of nominee, they have rightly stuck to the nominee whose name was entered at the time of taking the policy. On the face of controversy between the wife and mother of the life assured making claim and counter-claim on the amount of the policies, they have denied the claim of the complainant. The direction of the District Forum for payment of the assured value, compensation and litigation cost appears to us to be wholly unsustainable inasmuch as such controversial matters cannot be effectively adjudicated by the consumer fora and it is the common law forum which can entertain and effectively adjudicate such disputes.
7. In the result, therefore, we allow the appeal, set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 07.11.2005 passed by the District Forum, Nabarangpur in C.D. Case No.25 of 2005 and direct dismissal of the said consumer complaint.
Records received from the District Forum may be sent back forthwith.
.......
(Justice A.K. Samantaray) President ........
(Smarita Mohanty) Member SCDRC Orissa, Cuttack June ,2010/Nayak