Insurers have a duty to process claims promptly and cannot delay payment through evasive tactics or by failing to provide proper communication.

Order : (Per Smt.Meena Ramanathan, Hon’ble In-charge President)

1. This appeal is filed by the Appellants/Opposite Parties under Section 15 of Consumer Protection Act , 1986, praying this Commission to set aside the impugned orders of the District Commission-I, Hyderabad made in CC.No.149 of 2018, dt:

07.02.2020 by allowing the appeal with cost payable to this Appellant and pass such order or orders which may this Commission deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are described as arrayed in the complaint. The Appellants are the Opposite Parties and the Respondent is the Complainant in CC.No.149/2018.

[

3. Briefly stated, the facts are that – the Complainant is the daughter of the deceased/insured P.Mallaiah who had obtained GPA policy vide No.361201/42/12/8200000068 for a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- from the Appellants/Opposite Parties on 21.05.2012 covering the period from 21.05.2012 to 20.05.2013 by paying the requisite premium of Rs.260.68 paise. The Complainant is the nominee of the policy.

4. On 31.03.2013, the insured died in a road accident and a case was registered vide Crime No.62/2013 by the Kothakota Police Station for the offence U/s.304-A of IPC. Despite submission of all the relevant documents, there has been no response from the Opposite Parties and not settling the claim, amounts to deficiency in service and hence the present complaint is instituted for the agony suffered by the Complainant.

5. The Opposite Parties filed their written version contending that the alleged accident as per complaint occurred on 31.03.2013 and the complaint is filed on 12.03.2018 i.e., beyond the period of limitation of two years from the date of occurrence of the incident. Hence, there is lack of jurisdiction and the complaint is filed with a malafide intention to have an unlawful gain. Despite requesting the Complainant to furnish the requisite documents such as copies of FIR, Panchanama, PME, Bank details, Death Certificate, ID Proof of nominee etc., the Complainant failed to furnish the same for the reasons best known to her. Therefore, the claim was treated as ‘No Claim’.

6. It is further contended that the proper Forum to agitate the said claim is Motor Accident Claim Tribunal but not Consumer Forum. The death of the insured had taken place due to bike accident, but the owner of the vehicle is not made a party nor the Insurance Company of the Motor Cycle is made a party to the proceedings. As such the complaint is to be dismissed for non-

joinder of necessary parties.

The Insurance Policy of the motor cycle and driving license also not filed. Even in the FIR there is no mention of the accused who had caused the accident nor any details were given, but only vehicle number is given in place of the accused. The post mortem report is not filed which would prove the cause of death. But the Complainant had failed to submit the same. The Complainant has not come to the Court with clean hands. Therefore, complaint is liable to be dismissed.

7. Before the District Commission, the Complainant filed evidence affidavit and got marked Ex.A1 to A13 on her behalf. Evidence affidavit of Opposite Parties filed. Ex.B1 to B4 are marked on their behalf.

8. The District Commission after hearing and considering the material on record, allowed the complaint directing the Opposite Parties to pay an insured amount of Rs.4,00,000/- to the Complainant with interest @ 12% p.a. from 01.04.2013 to the date of payment; to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for causing mental agony by not settling the claim; to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards cost of legal expenses incurred by the Complainant. Time for compliance is 30 days from the date of service of the order.

9. Aggrieved by the said order