KURRA MARONI Vs. BAJAJ ALLIANZ INSURANCE LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this order, I propose to dispose the above two revision petitions arising out of same order of the State Commission Andhra Pradesh in FA No. 653 of 2011 and 419 of 2011, involving similar question of law and fact.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts relevant for the disposal of this revision petition are that husband of the petitioner opened a Saving Bank Account with the opposite party bank. Against the said account, he was issued ATM/Debit Card. According to the complainant, as per the terms and conditions, the ATM card holder was extended insurance of Rs.5.00 lacs under an arrangement between the respondent bank as also the respondent insurance company. On 03.08.2009, husband of the complainant was attacked by his opponents resulting in his death regarding which crime case No. 99/09 under section 147, 148, 302 r/w section 149 IPC was registered. The complainant as per the insurance extended under the debit card lodged the insurance claim but it was repudiated. Claiming this to be deficiency in service, the petitioner filed consumer complaint in the District Forum. 2. Opposite party No.1 bank resisted the complaint. In the written statement, it was admitted that deceased was an account holder of the bank under which debit card facility was given to him. It was also admitted that as per the terms and conditions of debit card, personal accident insurance coverage was extended to the deceased for Rs.5.00 lacs under an arrangement with OP No.2 but the insurance cover was subject to terms and conditions mentioned in the booklet forwarded alongwith debit card. According to OP No.1, the accident insurance was payable only if the debit card is used in at least one Point of Sale transaction with some merchant outlet within 365 days prior to the date of accident. Since there was no such transaction within 365 days preceding the death of husband of the petitioner, the insurance claim was rightly repudiated. It was also pleaded that as per the terms and conditions, in order to be entitled for accident insurance claim, the account holder was required to maintain average quarterly balance of Rs.5000/ - in case of urban branch and Rs.25,000/ - in case of semi urban or rural branch. This condition was also not fulfilled by the husband of the petitioner. As such on this count also, the insurance claim was rightly repudiated.

(3.) OPPOSITE Party insurance company also took similar pleas in the written statement.