Back
UTTAR PRADESH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Bhanwar Singh, President and Rachna, Member
SANT VINOBA POST GRADUATE DEGREE COLLEGE - Appellant
Versus
SHAKILA BANO AND ORS. - Respondents
Appeal No. 2638 of 2003
Decided on : 13-08-2009
Mr. Gopal Jee Srivastava, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. V.S. Bisaria, Advocate, Mr. B.K. Upadhyaya, Advocate, for the Respondent
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the responsibility for group insurance payment lies with the LIC and not the appellant college, and that the group insurance policy cannot be terminated on the individual lapse of an employee.
Headnote:
Insurance - Group Insurance - 1987, 2003 - The court discussed the Group Insurance Masters Policy and the responsibility of the appellant college and LIC in making payments. The court referred to the delay in remitting premiums and the termination of the policy, highlighting that the group insurance policy cannot be terminated on the individual lapse of an employee.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant college was held liable to make payment of the group insurance money due to two deceased employees' widows, while the LIC was exonerated of its liability. The appellant appealed, claiming no knowledge of the proceedings and delay in filing the appeal.
Finding of the Court:
The court condoned the delay in the interest of justice and the widows, and dismissed the technical objections raised by the LIC. It found that the appellant college was not at fault for any default and held the LIC responsible for payment of the group insurance money to the widows with interest.
Issues: Knowledge of proceedings, delay in filing appeal, liability for group insurance payment, and termination of the policy.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appellant college was not to blame for any default and cannot be held liable for payment of the group insurance money, placing the responsibility on the LIC. It emphasized that the group insurance policy cannot be terminated on the individual lapse of an employee.
Final Decision: The court set aside the judgment of the Forum below, exonerated the LIC of its liability, and held the LIC responsible for payment of the group insurance money to the widows with interest.
ORDER
Bhanwar Singh, President (Oral)- Heard Mr. Gopal Jee Srivastava, learned Counsel for the appellant, Mr. V.S. Bisaria, learned Counsel for the L.I.C. and Mr. B.K. Upadhyaya, learned Counsel for the two respondents/complainants.
2. The judgment dated 9.7.2003 of the District Consumer Forum, Deoria has been subjected to challenge. By means of the said judgment the appellant Sant Vinoba Post Graduate Degree College, Deoria alone was held liable to make payment of the group insurance money due to the two complainants to the exclusion of L.I.C. of its liability.
3. In short, it may be stated that the two deceased employees of the appellant college, namely late Azahar Husain Lari husband of Smt. Shakila Bano and Sri Anant Sharan Tiwari the husband of Smt. Shanti Tiwari both having a cover of G.I.C. expired on 29.10.2000 and 23.3.2000 respectively. The widows of the two deceased employees asked for the payment of Group Insurance Masters Policy amounting to Rs. 20,000 and Rs. 80,000 in case of Sri Azahar Husain Lari and Sri Anant Tiwari respectively. The LIC repudiated the claim on the ground of policies having lapsed. The District Consumer Forum, Deoria approved of the repudiation by the LIC but held the appellant college responsible for payment of Rs. 15,249 in case of Shakila Bano and Rs. 62,275 in the other case.
4. The appellant has preferred this appeal with the averment that it had no knowledge of the proceedings of the complaint or that of decision in question; rather it came to learn about the judgment on 6.9.2003 and after obtaining certified copy of the judgment the present appeal was preferred on 30.9.2003.
5. Mr. V.S. Bisaria, learned Counsel for the LIC has raised the issue of limitation and contended that it is a time barred appeal with no application for condonation of delay. However, having regard to the appellants' averment that they had no knowledge of the judgment or the proceedings, we condone the delay in the interest of justice and in the interest of two widows who having lost their husbands have been waiting for payment of their dues for the last over nine years.
6. The other technical objection raised on behalf of the LIC is that the complaint of the two widows suffered from the principle of misfeasance as the two complainants could not have come together without permission of the Forum. However, since this issue was not raised before the Forum below it cannot be permitted to be raised in the Appellate Court and, therefore, we do not find that there is any hindrance in proceeding further with the disposal of this appeal.
7. Coming to the merit of the appeal, it may be observed that the appellant's learned Counsel has submitted before us the statement of accounts ranging from the year 1987 upto November, 2003 a perusal of which would clearly show that from the year 1987 till 2003 the money of the group insurance deducted by the college from the salary of its employees was remitted to the LIC every month with there being not a single default on its part. In the case of the two deceased persons an another statement of account duly signed by the Principal would clearly reveal that an amount of Rs. 22,400 deducted from the employees salary including Sri Anant Sharan Tiwari for the month of February, 2000 had been despatched vide Draft No. RPX-468666 on February 10, 2000 i.e. more than one and half months prior to the death of Sri Anant Sharan Tiwari. Likewise in the case of other deceased namely Md. Azahar Husain Lari the last premium deducted from his salary for the month of October 2000 was remitted vide Draft No. SBN-115776 on 20.10.2000 i.e. nine days before the death of Sri Azahar Husain Lari. These documents have not been confronted by the LIC by bringing on record their statement of accounts. In this context, it would be relevant to note that the appellant college as mentioned earlier having no knowledge about the proceedings of a complaint could not have had any opportunity to contest the claim of the LIC by
