##PAGE1##

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

MADHYA PRADESH

FIRST APPEAL NO. SC/23/A/16/1648

BANK OF INDIA

PRESENT ADDRESS - ANAND NAGAR BR., KHANDWA, DIST. KHANDWA. THRO BR.

MANAGER. ,MADHYA PRADESH.

.......Appellant(s)

Versus

SMT.ANITA

PRESENT ADDRESS - R/O 12, MEDICAL COLONY, KHANDWA, DIST. KHANDWA. ,MADHYA

PRADESH.

NATIONAL INSU.CO.LTD.

PRESENT ADDRESS - PADAWA, ABV.DAINIK BHASKAR OFFICE, KHANDWA, DIST.

KHANDWA. ,MADHYA PRADESH.

.......Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA YADAV , PRESIDENT

HON'BLE MRS. DR. MONIKA MALIK , MEMBER

FOR THE APPELLANT:

BANK OF INDIA

DATED: 23/12/2025

ORDER

M. P. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

PLOT NO.76, ARERA HILLS, BHOPAL

FIRST APPEAL NO. 1648 OF 2016

(Arising out of order dated 20.09.2016 passed in C.C.No.216/2015 by District Commission, Khandwa)

BANK OF INDIA,

ANAND NAGAR BRANCH,

KHANDWA THROUGH BRANCH MANAGER … APPELLANT.

Versus

1. SMT. ANITA

W/O SHRI NARENDRA SAND,

R/O 12, MEDICAL COLONY,

KHANDWA (M.P.)

2. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,

PADAWA, ABOVE DAINIK BHASKAR OFFICE,

KHANDWA THROUGH DIVISIONAL MANAGER …. RESPONDENTS.

BEFORE :

HON’BLE JUSTICE SUNITA YADAV : PRESIDENT

HON’BLE DR. MONIKA MALIK : MEMBER

COUNSEL FOR PARTIES :

Shri H. R. Mutreja, learned counsel for the appellant.

None for the respondent no.1.

Ms. Preetima Shrivastava, learned counsel for the respondent no.2.

O R D E R

(Passed On 23.12.2025)

Per Say Justice Sunita Yadav, President:

The opposite party no.1-Bank of India/appellant has filed this appeal

against the order dated 20.09.2016 passed by the District Consumer Disputes

Redressal Commission, Khandwa (for short ‘District Commission’) in

C.C.No.216/2015 whereby the complaint filed by the complainant/respondent no.1

has been allowed.

-2-

2. In short, the facts of the case are that the complainant is account holder

of opposite party no.1-bank and the opposite party no.2-insurance company is an

authorized agent of the opposite party no.1-bank to issue National Health Insurance

Policy. The complainant/respondent no.1 is account holder of the opposite party

no.1/appellant-bank and from the year 2008-09 after getting the requisite form filled

had obtained Health Insurance Policy till 2013-14 which was valid till 26.06.2014. It

is alleged by the complainant that she had deposited Rs.3,500/- in her account and

thus there was balance of Rs.4,226/- and the new policy was to be commenced

from 27.06.2014. It is alleged that since new policy commencing from 27.06.2014

was not revived, the complainant had approached the appellant-bank on 12.08.2014

and came to know that since there was not sufficient balance in her account, the

said policy could not be renewed. It is further submitted by the complainant that she

had fallen ill in May-2015 and undergone surgery at Indore Hospital and had

incurred Rs.1,56,613/- towards medical and other expenses and since the policy

was not renewed, the complainant was deprived of health insurance benefits. The

complainant therefore alleging deficiency in service on part of the opposite parties

approached the District Commission seeking relief.

3. The opposite party no.1-bank in its reply before the District Commission

resisted the complaint stating that there was no standing

-3-

instructions of the complainant to the bank to remit the premium to the insurance

company after deducting the same from her account. For the first time on

09.06.2015 the complainant had given in writing to the bank to deduct the amount

from her account and remit the same to the opposite party no.2-insurance company.

There was no mandate of automatic deduction of premium. There has been no

deficiency in service on part of the opposite party no.1-bank and therefore the

complaint against it be dismissed.

4. The opposite party no.2-insurance company in its reply before the

District Commission submitted that the complainant/respondent no.1 failed to pay

any premium for renewal of insurance policy for the period 27.06.2014 to

26.06.2015 and therefore the policy could not be renewed. The