S.C.VYAS,PRESIDENT (ORAL) - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 31.12.2007, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raipur (hereinafter called as "District Forum" for short), in complaint case No. 112/2007, whereby the complaint of the appellant has been dismissed.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts of the case are that deceased husband of the complainant/ appellant Mr. Sitaram Sahu, had made a proposal for Postal Life Insurance of Rs. 25,000 and Rs. 2,889 were also deposited by him. He died on 29.7.2003 i.e. after around four months from the date of such proposal. Later on, the proposal of insurance was accepted by the Postal Authorities on 18.11.2003, then a claim was preferred by the appellant before Postal Authorities, which was repudiated on the ground that during the lifetime of Mr. Sitaram Sahu, no proposal of insurance was accepted and there was no agreement for contract between the parties. Then appellant filed complaint before District Forum on same grounds. The respondent in written version reasserted the fact that the deceased Mr. Sitaram Sahu had already died before acceptance of the proposal and so no amount was payable under the policy. This contention of respondent was accepted by the District Forum and the complaint was dismissed, that is how the complainant has come before this Commission by way of this appeal.
(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the appellant Mr. M.M. Sahu submitted that the proposal of insurance of deceased Mr. Sitaram Sahu was unnecessarily kept pending by the respondent for about 8 months. Whereas such proposal was required to be accepted within a month as per Annexure A -9. He submitted that the Department has committed deficiency in service in not accepting proposal for insurance within a reasonable time and, therefore, the amount of insurance was required to be awarded to the complainant by way of compensation. Refuting these arguments, learned Counsel for respondent submitted that there was no enforceable insurance contract between the parties and, therefore, no amount was payable under any such contract. He submitted that mere proposal cannot take the place of contract, thus, learned District Forum has not committed any mistake in dismissing the complaint.;