R.S. Sharma, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 28.6.2013, passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) (henceforth "District Forum") in Complaint No. 108/2012. By the impugned order, the learned District Forum, dismissed the complaint filed by the appellant/complainant. Briefly stated, the facts of the complaint filed by the appellant/complainant before the District Forum are: that Mohan Lal Rawte, husband of the appellant/complainant was insured with Life Insurance Corporation of India (respondent No. 3/O.P. No. 3), through respondent No. 2/O.P. No. 2 Samudayik Vikas Samiti, Lakholi and became member of "Janshree Beema Yojna". Late Mohan Lal Rawte, the husband of the appellant/complainant deposited amount of premium Rs. 25 on 28.1.2012 before respondent No. 2/O.P. No. 2. Mohan Lal Rawte, died on 1.3.2012 and the appellant/complainant, is nominee of the deceased Mohan Lal Rawte. Claim was preferred by the appellant/complainant, who is nominee of Mohan Lal Rawte for compensation of Rs. 30,000, which was payable under the terms of the policy before the Life Insurance Corporation of India, but the claim of the appellant/complainant was repudiated by the respondent No. 3/O.P. No. 3/Life Insurance Corporation of India on the ground that premium was deposited in the office of the Life Insurance Corporation of India on 6.3.2012 and prior to deposit of the amount of premium, Mohan Lal Rawte, had already died on 1.3.2012. Thus, no amount of premium was deposited during the life -time of Mohan Lal Rawte and he was not insured under the Scheme by the Life Insurance Corporation of India (respondent No. 3/O.P. No. 3). Therefore, the appellant/complainant filed consumer complaint before the District Forum seeking compensation under different heads.
(2.) THE respondents/OPs filed their respective written statement before the District Forum and denied the allegations made by the appellant/complainant in the complaint. The respondent No. 3/O.P. No. 3 specifically pleaded that the amount of premium was deposited on 6.3.2012 and prior to depositing the amount, Mohan Lal Rawte, had already died, therefore, he was not insured with the Insurance Corporation under the Janshree Beema Yojna and the appellant/complainant is not entitled for any amount under the policy. Learned District Forum after having considered the material placed before it by the parties dismissed the complaint.
(3.) MR . Sanjay Tiwari, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant/complainant argued that during the lifetime of Mohan Lal Rawte, he had paid a sum of Rs. 25 as premium under the Janshree Veema Yojna and the said Scheme was sponsored by the Government of Chhattisgarh, as per tri -party agreement between the Life Insurance Corporation of India, Government of Chhattisgarh and the Nodal Agency and as per the Scheme, some portion of premium was to be paid by the insured and some amount was to be added by Nodal Agency and then a sum equal to the total of the amount paid by insured and Nodal Agency was required to be added by the Life Insurance Corporation of India as one -time premium of that insurance policy and then the benefit of the policy was to be given to all those beneficiaries, who have been insured under the said scheme. He further argued that Mohan Lal Rawte, deposited his share and respondent No. 2/O.P. No. 2 Samudayik Vikas Samiti, Lakholi was working as a Nodal Agency and the name of Mohan Lal Rawte, was included in the list of such persons and the respondent No. 2/O.P. No. 2 Samudayik Vikas Samiti, Lakholi was also included in the list issued by respondent No. 1/O.P. No. 1 Jila Shahri Vikas Abhikaran. Mohan Lal Rawte paid his share, therefore, if the respondent No. 2/O.P. No. 2 could not deposit the amount of premium collected by it to the Insurance Corporation, then the appellant/complainant cannot be punished for negligent act of the respondent No. 2/O.P. No. 2 and the appellant/complainant is entitled to get said benefit of Rs. 30,000 under the Policy.;