Chief of Pune District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, VP Utpat, and Forum member SM Kumbhar have directed Bank of Maharashtra (BoM) to pay Rs16,000 to Shukrawar Peth resident who did not get mediclaim benefits owing to neglect of the Bank.
The forum asked the Bank to pay within within six weeks, Rs10,000 as compensation for the mediclaim benefits he lost, Rs5,000 for the mental agony he suffered, and Rs1,000 as suit charges, totalling Rs16,000.
Vinod Takhatmal Kothari, a resident of Shukrawar peth had moved a plaint against BoM regional office at Lokmangal in Shivajinagar on September 13, 2010, for alleged inefficiency of services.
According to Kothari’s complaint, he ran a proprietary concern named Sha Takhatmal Foujimalji Kothari and had a current account with BoM for six years. He had availed a mediclaim insurance policy from the Oriental Insurance Company 13 years ago. It was a joint policy with his wife Pista being the other member.
“I renewed the joint policy on November 5, 2009. On November 4, 2009, I had issued a cheque for Rs8,446 by way of premium of policy. On previous day that is on November 3, 2009, I had deposited a cheque for Rs 14,024, which was drawn on Union Bank of India in my current account. I was under the impression that the cheque must have been credited in my current account.
“Due to the mistake of BoM, the cheque was credited in another account and the cheque which was issued in favour of Oriental Insurance Company was dishonoured on November 7, 2009. Because of this, the insurance company cancelled the mediclaim policy I had bought. This is the bank’s inefficiency.
“Since I am a heart patient, I had been renewing the mediclaim policy for the past 13 years regularly. Under this policy, I was entitled for reimbursements of all the expenses, hospitalisation and surgical expenses. But because the policy got cancelled, I lost the security of life even after years of regular renewals. I did not get the benefit for heart disease due to a clause about pre-existing disease,” Kothari said.
In its defence, the BoM lawyer had said before the Forum, “We refuse to accept that the Kotharis’ mediclaim policy got cancelled because of our mistake. The error was technical. Crediting of the cheque presented by Kothari and its dishonour was by default and not deliberate. It’s his negligence in issuing cheque in favour of an insurance company without verifying the balance in his account. He is not a consumer and hence his complaint should be dismissed.”
The Forum observed, “It is important to note that the cheque, which was issued by Kothari was not for commerical transaction, but for securing his life. Hence the objection raised by BoM cannot be accepted. The case shows the bank’s inefficiency. Kothari is a consumer and is entitled for compensation.”
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}