9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 984X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... emium from the loan account - A perusal of the pleadings and record, would show that both these findings are factually incorrect. It is the admitted position that the deceased husband of the Appellant had paid the insurance premium by a Demand Draft in favour of the Insurance Company. This has been acknowledged in paragraph 4(c) of the Revision Petition filed by the Respondent Finance Company - As a consequence, the risk would be covered from the date of payment of the insurance premium. The loan was secured from the date on which the insurance premium was paid. The premium having been paid by the Appellant s husband during his lifetime, the loan was to be adjusted from the insurance policy. The National Commission has erroneously set aside the Order passed by the State Commission on factually incorrect grounds - The Appellant has made out a clear case of deficiency of service on the part of the Respondent Finance Company - the Order dated 30.11.2018 passed by the National Commission is set aside - appeal allowed. - CIVIL APPEAL NO.3962 OF 2019 (Arising out of SLP (Civil) No. 4925 of 2019) - - - Dated:- 16-4-2019 - UDAY UMESH LALIT And INDU MALHOTRA, JJ. JUDGMENT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cted from the loan amount towards processing fee and stamp charges. 2.9. The Appellant filed a Consumer Complaint before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Nanded. The Appellant submitted that after the loan was sanctioned on 27.02.2015, the amount was credited to the loan account after deducting the insurance premium. The Respondent Finance Company obtained the insurance policy from its sister concern on 30.03.2015. Had the insurance policy been issued when the loan was advanced, the amount would have been recovered through the insurance policy. There was therefore a deficiency of service by the Respondent Finance Company in delay in obtaining the insurance policy from its sister concern. The Respondent Finance Company was not entitled to recover the loan from the Appellant. The Appellant prayed that the Respondent Finance Company be restrained from recovering the loan amount from her, since the recovery was wrong and unreasonable, and prayed for payment of compensation. 2.10. The District Forum allowed the Consumer Complaint filed by the Appellant vide Order dated 27.02.2017. It was held that since the Appellant s husband had paid the 1st loan instal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has filed the present Civil Appeal. 3. We have heard learned Counsel for both parties, and perused the pleadings on record. 3.1. The National Commission, in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction, has set aside the concurrent findings of the District Forum and State Commission, by the impugned Order dated 30.11.2018. The revisional jurisdiction of the National Commission is a limited jurisdiction, Galada Power and Telecommunication Limited v. United India Insurance Company Limited Anr., (2016) 14 SCC 161 to be exercised in case the State Commission lacked jurisdiction, or acted with illegality or material irregularity. Rubi (Chandra) Dutta v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., (2011) 11 SCC 269. Section 21(b) reads as follows : call for the records and pass appropriate orders in any consumer dispute which is pending before or has been decided by any State Commission where it appears to the National Commission that such State Commission has exercised a jurisdiction not vested in it by law, or has failed to exercise a jurisdiction so vested, or has acted in the exercise of its jurisdiction illegally or with material irregularity. (emphasis supplied) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Group Insurance Policy dated 30.03.2015 was issued to 280 borrowers, with the loan amounts mentioned against their respective names. Thus, the deduction of ₹ 2,120/from the loan account was towards processing of the composite transaction. 3.5. The deceased husband of the Appellant had fulfilled his part of the transaction, by depositing ₹ 400/by way of the Demand Draft towards the insurance premium, and also the charges of ₹ 2,120/towards processing of the loan transaction. 3.6. The Respondent Finance Company however delayed in forwarding the amount to the Insurance Company for obtaining the insurance policy, which was issued on 30.03.2015 for the period 30.03.2015 to 29.03.2016. Hence, there was a clear deficiency of service by the Respondent Finance Company in delay in obtaining the insurance policy from its sister concern. 3.7. Section 64VB(2) of the Insurance Act, 1938 provides that : For the purposes of this section, in the case of risks for which premium can be ascertained in advance, the risk may be assumed not earlier than the date on which the premium has been paid in cash or by cheque to the insurer. It is the admitted positio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
