IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Nominee - The complainant is the nominee of the deceased in the bank account and he has right to file the complaint.
(2) Bank Account - All legal heirs of the deceased were not necessary to be added as complainant or their NoC is also not necessary to file the complaint as being the complainant was nominee of the deceased in the Bank Account.

ORDER (ORAL)

Gautam Chourdiya, President—This order will govern disposal of Appeal Nos.FA/21/47 & FA/21/88 as both these appeals, filed under section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter called “the Act” for short), have arisen out of the same impugned order dated 18.02.2021 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Raipur (hereinafter called “District Commission” for short), in Complaint Case No.CC/342/2018 filed by the respondent No.1 in both these appeals whereby the complaint was partly allowed and the appellants of both these appeals were held jointly or severally liable for payment of insurance amount of Rs.2,00,000/- along with interest @ 8% p.a. from the date of complaint with Rs.3,000/- as compensation for mental agony and cost of complaint Rs.2,000/-. Feeling aggrieved both the opposite parties, in that complaint case, have preferred these appeals. Hereinafter in this order, for the purpose of convenience, the parties will be referred as per their original status before the District Forum. Original of this order be retained in record of Appeal No.FA/21/47 and a copy of the same, be placed in the record of Appeal No.FA/21/88.

2. Brief facts, necessary for disposal of these appeals, are that the complainant is brother of deceased Amardeep Singh Chawla who was having Bank Account No.2966000100093772 with the opposite party No.1 – Bank. He availed RuPay Debit Card facility under the said bank account. As per case of the complainant, the opposite party No.1 obtained RuPay Card Holders Personal Accident Policy from the opposite party No.2 – Insurance Company, under which in the event of accidental death of the card holder an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- was payable. On 29.11.2015, the brother of the complainant, account holder of opposite party No.1, Amardeep Sing Chawla died in accident. The incident was intimated to the opposite party No.1, who gave claim form and demanded certain documents. The Claim Form duly filled along with all documents was submitted and documents regarding incident of accidental death were also submitted, but the genuine claim of the complainant was not paid by the opposite parties. The complainant wrote letter dated 08.03.2017 for payment of claim, which was replied by letter dated 10.03.2017 and thereafter the complainant on several occasions personally contacted and sent emails but he was constantly being shuffled by the opposite party and the claim was not paid. Again on 10.04.2018, the complainant wrote a letter to the opposite party requesting for payment of claim amount and copies of documents were also demanded, but no heed was paid and nothing was done by the opposite party, which amounted to deficiency in service. The complainant has also averred that the opposite parties verified as per their rule that whether the card was used by the account holder or not and it was found clearly proved that in specified period the card was used by the account holder. Thus alleging deficiency in service, the complaint was filed claiming the insurance cover amount of Rs.2,00,000/- along with interest and compensation for mental agony Rs.1,00,000/- was also sought.

3. Opposite party No.1 in its written statement opposed the contentions made by the complainant and took preliminary objection that neither details of all the legal representatives of the deceased have been mentioned in the complaint nor any no objection letter from the legal representatives of the deceased to file the compliant has been submitted. Therefore, at preliminary stage itself the complaint is liable to be dismissed for non-joinder of necessary parties. The opposite party No.1 further contended that the complainant was given claim form and asked to submit the same duly filled and along with all necessary documents, but the claim form and necessary documents were not submitted by the complainant, hence h