DIPALI BARUAH vs Unit Trust of India

THE present petition is by the wife of late Harendra Nath Baruah. After the petition was filed and accepted by this Commission, notices were issued on the opp. parties, but no appearance was caused. However, opp. parties, namely, Unit Trust of India, by letter dated 28.12.1992 addressed to the Secretary of this Commission replied to the notices issued by the Commission, which we shall deal at the appropriate stage.

THE present claim is for Rs. 1,50,000/-. THE husband of the petitioner died on 2.8.1992 at North Gauhati. He took a membership certificate vide Membership No.UL-900272004740 of U.T.I, for Rs. 30,000/-. After the death of late Harendra Nath Baruah, his wife i.e. the present petitioner approached the Gauhati office for settlement of the claim, but it has not been done till date. In addition to the amount of Rs. 30,000/-, the petitioner has claimed interest @ 18% per annum from 24.8.1992, which is the date on which the claim was lodged at Gauhati office of the UTI. In the petition, office of the UTI, Gauhati and Calcutta have been impleaded as opp. parties Nos. 1 and 2 respectively. As stated above, this Commission received the letter from the Calcutta office and in the said letter we were informed that in absence of death certificate from the Municipal Authorities/Gaon Panchayat, the claim could not be settled and this fact was duly intimated to the petitioner by letter dated 27.10.1992 and subsequently by reminder on 26.11.1992.

On behalf of the petitioner her brother-in-law Sri Fathik Ch. Baruah has been examined as witness No. 1. As no appearance was caused on behalf of the opp. parties, the petition has been taken up as ex-parte and there is no cross-examination.

THE above witness has proved that the membership certificate, exhibit-1 and also the fact thatup-to-date premium was paid vide Exhibit-1(1) on the reverse of the membership certificate. From the certificate, we find that the annual contribution was for Rs. 2,000/- and the last instalment was paid by cheque dated 18.5.1992. As the claim has not been disputed on the ground of non receipt of premium we need not enter into this aspect of the matter. From the evidence of the above witness No. 1, we find that on 24.8.1992 all the papers have submitted by the claimant-petitioner to the Officer-in-charge of the Gauhati Office of the opp. parties and the Exhibit-2 is the said receipt. Subsequently, by Exhibit-3 the letter issued on behalf of the petitioner to the office of the opp. parties at Calcutta on 28.10.1992, requested for early settlement. Exhibits is the letter from the Gauhati office of the op. parties to the Calcutta office forwarding the letter etc. submitted by the petitioner and requesting for early settlement and indicating also about harassment. Exhibit-5 is another letter dated 27.10.1992 from the Calcutta office to the petitioner asking for death certificate as stated above. This death certificate was issued by Gaon Panchayat on 19.11.1992 and a copy of the said certificate has been marked as Exhibit-7. The original certificate was submitted by the petitioner to the Gauhati office and Exhibit-6 is the said letter, Exhibit 6(1) is the acknowledgement of the Gauhati office and according to the said acknowledgement the death certificate in original was received and it was sent to the Calcutta office on 12.1.1993. 7.Thus from the above documents, it is clear that the ground on which the claim could not be settled no longer exists as the original death certificate from the Gaon Panchayat has been duly forwarded to the Calcutta Office by the Gauhati office of UTI on 12.1.1993. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to get interest on the sum of Rs. 30,000/-.

NOW, the question is regarding date of interest. Though the petitioner has claimed interest from 24.8.1992. The date on which the claim was lodged at Gauhati Office we are unable to accept this date as we have to give some time to the opp. parties to process the matter. In the letter sent by Calcutta Office of UTI to this Commission, it was stated that the death certificate was asked for by letter dated 27.10.1992, but receipt of this letter has been denied. It is admitted that subsequent reminder dated 26.11.1992 was received by the petitioner through Gauhati Office. We have also noted that the death certificate was also issued as stated above on 19.11.1992. Though the said certificate was forwarded by Gauhati Office to Calcutta Office, on 12.1.1993, we are of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to get from earlier date as we find that there was some negligency on the part of the opp. parties in rendering service in the present case. We have considered the entire matter and we are of the opinion that the petitioner shall be entitled to get interest from 1.12.1992. Accordingly, the present petition is accepted and allowed. Opp. parties are directed to pay the insured, sum of Rs. 30,000/- together with interest @ 18%peraruiumontheabovesumfrom 1.12.1992. fhe amount shall be paid within a period of 2 months failing which the interest shall increase to 20% per annum. Considering the fact that the present petition has been filed by a widow, it deseives sympathy. Accordingly, we direct the office to send a copy of this order by registered post to the in-charge of the Gauhati Office so that the claim can be settled forthwith. Though the petitioner has claimed compensation for delay, we are of the opinion that cost of this petition which we quantify at Rs.500/- would meet the ends of justice. 11.The petition is disposed of accordingly. Complaint allowed with costs. ______________