STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. CAPT. JOSE HORMESE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Sec. 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, 'the Act') is directed against the order dtd. 1/12/2017 of the Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chennai (in short, 'the State Commission') in CC no.40 of 2009 allowing the complaint filed by the appellant and seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded.

(2.) This order will also dispose of FA no.267 of 2018 filed by the respondent, as both the appeals emanate from the same order. For the sake of convenience the facts are taken from FA No.1007 of 2018, which is treated as the lead case.

(3.) The facts, in brief, are that the complainant is a co-pilot in Indian Airlines Corporation/ NACIL (Air India) having a policy with Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd., for Rs.75.00 lakh which as on 1/1/2005, had an accrued cumulative bonus of Rs.1,50,000.00. The policy was due for renewal on 31/12/2008, accordingly, the appellant issued a cheque dtd. 29/12/2008 for Rs.29,128.00 towards the premium drawn on the respondent Bank which had sufficient balance in his Savings Bank Account as on that date. However, when the insurer presented the cheque to its Banker viz., Standard Chartered Bank, Mumbai, the same was returned with the endorsement 'funds insufficient' which was belatedly intimated to the appellant on 25/2/9. On 21/2/2009, the insurer informed the appellant that the insurance had become void as the cheque for premium stood returned for insufficient funds. The appellant has contended that after he pursued the matter with the Bank at various levels, including at the level of the Chief Manager, Service Branch and the Chairman, the respondent Bank admitted that the respondent's Bank branch had not linked the Multi Option Deposits (MOD) to the savings account which resulted in the cheque not being honoured and acknowledged the lapse on its part and offered to pay the insurance amount on behalf of the appellant. It is the contention of the appellant that the respondent had acknowledged that it failed to link the MOD linked deposits with the savings bank account and consequently, the appellant was forced to operate over 50 flights between 1/1/2009 and 20/3/2009 without the benefit of insurance cover which caused him considerable agony and anxiety and that subsequently the Bank harassed him by contending that there was no lapse on their part until finally acknowledging its lapse by tendering an apology. It is contended that apart from the fact that he was not covered for an insurance for a high risk job due to the dishonouring of the cheque on the ground of insufficient funds, the incident was derogatory and defamatory to him apart from the fact that the arrogant behavior of the Bank's staff was also demoralizing.