Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4. Stating to be a case of 'deficiency in service' and 'unfair trade practice' on the part of OPs, the complaint was filed by the complainant for issuance of directions to OPs to release the full claim amount of policy of Rs.4,50,000/-.

5. Upon issuance of notice by the District Commission, OPs appeared through their counsel and filed joint reply by raising certain preliminary objections stating therein that the complaint filed by the complainant was for release of full claim of Rs.4,50,000/- under policy No.131196988 dated 28.03.1998 whereas, the said policy was for a sum assured of Rs.25,000/- only. It was also mentioned in the reply that the complainant had filed another complaint before Permanent Lok Adalat Public Utility Services, Fazilka bearing No.13877 dated 22.11.2013 for claiming disability benefits under the policy No.131196988 dated 28.03.1998. He himself had mentioned that the sum assured of the policy was Rs.25,000/-. The date of maturity was 28.3.2018 and the maturity claim for an amount of Rs.32,650/- which includes basic sum assured of Rs.6250/- (25% of the sum assured of Rs.25000/- plus vested bonus of Rs.25,900/- plus Rs.500/- as final additional bonus under the policy) had been paid to the complainant on 28.03.2018. The said fact had been concealed by the complainant. Survival benefit of Rs.6250/- had also been paid to him on 28.3.2015, 28.03.2016 and 28.03.2017 as per terms and conditions of the policy. Nothing else remained to be paid to him with regard to the full sum assured. All the benefits under the policy in question had been duly given to the complainant except the disability benefit which has been repudiated vide letter dated 11.8.2010 as per clause 9 (a) of the policy in question. It was also mentioned in the reply that as per FIR No.12 dated 5.2.2009, PS Khuian Sarwar as well as of the previous complaint filed before Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services), Fazilka, the accident of the complainant took place on 04.02.2008 and the said date had been concealed by the complainant. However, as per the discharge card of the complainant, the treatment given was "Guillotine amputation of right lower limb above knee" done under SA on 9.4.2010. The amputation of right limb was done almost after more than 2 years of the accident and not within 90 days from date of the accident. Therefore the complainant was not entitled to disability benefit on this account. In respect of other policy No.471188826 and 131002540 of the complainant in addition to policy No.131196988 i.e. policy in dispute, the disability benefit under all the three policies had been rightly repudiated vide letter dated 11.08.2010. All other allegations of the complaint had been denied and they prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

Issuance of Disability Certificate : 09.06.2010 (Ex.OPs/10) 16.10.2017 (Ex.C-4) Date of filing of application before the Permanent Lok Adalat, Fazilka : 03.10.2013 Decision by Lok Adalat : 01.03.2021 Date of filing CC before Distt. Commission : 16.01.2020 Date of Decision : 07.06.2021

15. Admittedly, the appellant/complainant had availed two remedies one before the Permanent Lok Adalat and second during the pendency of application for the Lok Adalat, he had also filed Consumer Complaint No.28 of 2020 before the District Commission. The action of appellant/complainant while availing two remedies so availed is clearly against the Doctrine of Election as decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case titled as "M/s Imperial Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. V. Anil Patni and Anr.", reported in I (2021) SLT 85+1 (2021) CPJ 3 (SC)+ 2020 10 SCC 783, wherein it has been held that Doctrine of Election is applicable and it is always open to a person either to approach the fora under Consumer Protection Act, 1986/2019, or to approach any other Authority. The person who has approached to any of the authorities at first instance is estopped from approaching other authorities as per Doctrine of Election applies. Meaning thereby admittedly the complainant had approached Permanent Lok Adalat on 03.10.2013 much prior to filing of consumer complaint before the District Commission on 16.01.2020. It has been brought to our notice that an application No.13877 of 2013 was filed before Permanent Lok Adalat (Public Utility Services), Fazilka, and it was dismissed vide order dated 01.03.2021, the relevant part of the order is reproduced as under:-