Back
CHATTISGARH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
S.C. Vyas, President, Veena Misra and V.K. Patil, Members
SAHARA INDIA AND ANR. - Appellants
Versus
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND ANR. - Respondents
Appeal No. 69 of 2010
Decided on : 25-01-2010
Mr. Sanjay Tiwari, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mrs. Radharani Gupta, Advocate, Mr. R.K. Bhawnani, Advocate, for the Respondent
Consumers and customers of an Insurance Company have the right to claim the accidental benefit under an insurance policy and are responsible for paying the amount to the nominee of the insured.
Headnote:
Insurance Policy - Accidental Benefit - The court upheld the decision of the District Forum directing the appellants to pay the accidental benefit under the insurance policy to the complainant and recover the amount from the Insurance Company. The court found that the appellants, as consumers and customers of the Insurance Company, had the right to claim the accidental benefit under the policy.
Fact of the Case:
The wife of the complainant invested in a scheme with the appellants, who had obtained an insurance policy from the Insurance Company. When the wife died in a road accident, the appellants paid the death maturity amount but did not provide the accidental benefit. The complainant filed a consumer complaint.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellants were responsible for paying the accidental benefit under the insurance policy and upheld the decision of the District Forum to direct the appellants to pay the amount to the complainant and recover it from the Insurance Company.
Issues: The main issue was whether the appellants were liable to pay the accidental benefit under the insurance policy and if the complainant had the right to claim the amount.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appellants, as consumers and customers of the Insurance Company, had the right to claim the accidental benefit under the policy and were responsible for paying the amount to the complainant.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the court upheld the decision of the District Forum, directing the appellants to pay the accidental benefit to the complainant and recover the amount from the Insurance Company.
ORDER
S.C. Vyas, President (Oral)- This appeal is directed against order dated 30.12.2009 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rajnandgaon (hereinafter called as "District Forum" for short), in Complaint Case No. 09/2009, whereby the appellants herein, have been directed to pay the accidental benefit under the insurance policy to the complainant/respondent No. 2 of Rs. 1,50,000, along with interest @ 6% p.a. w.e.f. 30.3.2007 till date of payment and cost of litigation Rs. 1,000 with further direction that appellants will recover this amount from the Insurance Company i.e. respondent No. 1
2. It is not in dispute that wife of the complainant namely Smt. Geeta Devi Khandelwal invested Rs. 10,000 in Sahara Rajat Yojna of the appellants on 30.7.2003. For the members of that Scheme, the appellants herein, had obtained insurance policy from the National Insurance Company and under the terms of the policy in case of accidental death of the person, a sum of Rs. 50,000 is payable after a period of one year but before the period of two years, a sum of Rs. 1,00,000 after period of two years but before the period of three years, a sum of Rs. 1,50,000 after three years but before the period of four years and a sum of Rs. 2,00,000 after four years but before the period of 10 years. Smt. Geeta Devi Khandelwal died on 30.3.2007 in a road accident. Intimation of her death was given to the appellants by her husband and appellant paid death maturity amount of Rs. 13,970 to her husband, but amount of accidental benefit, was not provided and he was assured that document for payment of that amount was sent to the Head Office of the appellant company and the amount would be paid very soon. Later on, when for a long time, amount was not paid, then consumer complaint was filed.
3. Resisting the complaint, the appellants herein have averred that the premium of the insurance was paid by the appellants to the Insurance Company/respondent No. l and thereafter it was responsibility of the Insurance Company to pay that benefit available under the insurance policy. Appellants are not liable for paying any amount under this head and for this purpose complainant was not consumer of the appellants. Objection regarding maintainability of the complaint was also taken. The Insurance Company took the stand that no claim was preferred before it by any party nor intimation of death of Smt. Geeta Devi Khandelwal was sent to the Insurance Company and, therefore, it committed no deficiency in service.
4. Learned District Forum, after having considered the material placed before it, directed the appellants herein, to pay amount of accidental benefit to the complainant/respondent No. 2 with a liberty to recover the same from the Insurance Company/respondent No. l.
5. After having considered the arguments advanced by all parties and having perused the record of the District Forum, we do not find any substance in this appeal.
6. Copy of the insurance policy which is available in the record clearly shows that the name of the insured was Sahara India Limited, and thus it is clear that it was Sahara India Limited, who paid premium to the Insurance Company and applied for the insurance policies of all its customers under Group Personal Accident Policy, who are residing in whole part of the country. There is no material to show that any copy of this policy was ever provided to the deceased during her lifetime or to her nominee. It is also clear from the letter Annexure N.A.1 written by the Branch Manager, Rajnandgaon of the appellant company to Executive Worker Sector Office, Durg that before him, claim application as well as documents were filed by the complainant/nominee and then he had not forwarded those documents to the Insurance Company but had forwarded them to his own higher office for payment of death maturity amount without mentioning even for payment of accidental benefit. These documents clearly show that it was only Sahara India Limited, who took policy for its
