MONIKA Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 26.7.2010, rendered by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum -I, UT, Chandigarh (hereinafter to be called as the District Forum only) vide which it dismissed the complaint filed by the complainants (now appellants) on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction; that the same was barred by time and on merits.

(2.) THE facts, in brief, are that the complainants (now appellants) are the legal representatives of Shri Rajiv Kumar, who died on 11.10.2006, in a roadside accident, regarding which DDR No. 13 dated 12.10.2006 was registered at PS Jhandher, Police Distt. Majitha, Distt. Amritsar. The deceased, while working as Salesman, with M/s. Executive Ultrasound Machines, Mohali, had opened an account with the State Bank of India, against which, he was issued a SBI card. It was stated that the OPs issued him a certificate of insurance, on the basis of the said SBI card, as per which he was insured for Rs. 6 lacs, in the event of accidental death, during air travel, and for Rs. 2 lacs, in the event of accidental death, other than air travel. The complainants came to know of the insurance policy, only during the last week of May 2009. On 12.6.2009, the father of the deceased sent a letter to the OPs for releasing the insurance claim. However, the OPs, vide their letter dated 13.7.2009, did not entertain the claim, as the information about the death of the insured was given after 33 months. In August 2009, complainant No. 1, along with her father -in -law, Sh. Satish Kumar, approached OP -2 at Chandigarh and informed about the reasons for delay, but OP -2 did not consider the request. It was stated that the OPs were deficient, in rendering service. When the grievance of the complainants was not redressed, a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter to be called as the Act only) was filed.

(3.) THE OPs, in their written reply, pleaded that the District Forum had no territorial jurisdiction. It was further pleaded that the complaint involved complicated questions of law and fact and, as such, could not be decided by the District Forum, where the proceedings are of summary nature. It was further pleaded that the complaint was barred by time. It was stated that the deceased was insured under the personal accident cover, issued in the name of SBI Cards and Payments Services Ltd., valid from 1.1.2006 to 31.12.2006. It was denied that the deceased died in the alleged accident. It was further stated that the DDR and the Post -mortem report were concocted pieces of documents, which could not be relied upon. It was further stated that, even the intimation, about the death of the insured, was given after 33 months, which did not meet the requirements of the contract, as well as the provisions of law. It was denied that the OPs were deficient, in rendering service. The remaining averments, were denied, being wrong.