M. P. STATE  CONSUMER  DISPUTES  REDRESSAL  COMMISSION,                         

                             PLOT NO.76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL

 

                                      FIRST APPEAL NO. 1931 OF 2016

(Arising out of order dated 11.11.2016 passed in C.C.No.03/2015 by District Commission, Dindori)

 

HEAD SALES & MARKETING,

SBI LIFE INSURANCE CO.LTD.

NATRAJ, 101,201,301, JUNCTION OF

WESTERN EXPRESS HIGHWAY AND

ANDHERI KURLA ROAD, ANDHERI (E)

MUMBAI-400 069                                                                                           … APPELLANT.

 

                        Versus

 

1. SMT. KAMLA PARASTE,

    W/O SHRI AMAR PARASTE,

    PUSHKAR VILLA, WARD NO.6,

    NEAR SARASWATI SHISHU MANDIR,

    TEHSIL & DISTRICT-DINDORI, M.P.

 

2. MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA,

    MAIN BRANCH, KHANUJA COLONY ROAD,

    DINDORI, M.P.                                                                                         …. RESPONDENTS.   

                     

BEFORE :

            HON’BLE SHRI A. K. TIWARI                : PRESIDING MEMBER

            HON’BLE DR. SRIKANT PANDEY        :          MEMBER

                     

COUNSEL FOR PARTIES :

                Shri Nitin Jain, learned counsel for the appellant.

           Shri Shashank Pandey, learned counsel for the respondent no.1.

           None for the respondent no.2.

 

 O R D E R

(Passed On 23.08.2023)

                                The following order of the Commission was delivered by A. K. Tiwari, Presiding Member: 

           

                   This appeal by the opposite party/appellant-SBI Life Insurance Co. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ‘insurance company’) is directed against the order dated 11.11.2016 passed by the District Consumer Disputes

-2-

Redressal Commission, Dindori (for short ‘District Commission’) in C.C.No.03/2015, whereby the complaint filed by the complainant/respondent no.1 (hereinafter referred to as ‘complainant’) has been allowed.

2.                Facts of the case in short that the complainant’s husband Late Shri Chandrakant Paraste (hereinafter referred to as ‘deceased-insured’) during his lifetime on 21.03.2014 had obtained an insurance policy from the insurance company through the opposite party no.2/respondent no.2-State Bank of India (hereinafter referred to as ‘bank’) for which he had transferred Rs.25,000/- to the insurance company through electronic fund transfer. The sum assured under the policy was Rs.2,50,000/-. Her husband died on 15.04.2014 in a vehicle accident. It is submitted that she being a nominee filed a claim along with necessary documents with the bank despite that the opposite parties did not pay the claim. Legal notice was also given to the opposite parties.  The complainant therefore alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on part of the opposite parties approached the District Commission seeking relief.

3.                The insurance company in its reply before the District Commission denied of issuing any policy to the deceased. It is submitted that since no policy was issued to the deceased-insured therefore, the claim cannot be entertained. It is submitted that policy is issued after receiving the

-3-

premium as per the proposal form but the deceased-insured on the basis of proposal no.50QH208839 had transferred the premium amount in the account of the insurance company through electronic fund transfer on 21.03.2014 but since the proposal form was not received within 15 days, the insurance company rejected the same and got transferred the premium amount in the account of deceased-insured through electronic fund transfer. Thus no policy was issued to the deceased-insured. The insurance company informed the bank in this regard on 30.04.2014 and since no name and address of the complainant is available with the insurance company therefore, no information was given to the complainant separately. In such circumstances, in absence of any insurance policy, the insurance company

Click Here to Read the rest of this document