Haryana

Sonipat

CC/20/2015

ARUN DEVI D/O JAI PARKASH - Complainant(s)

Versus

1. RELIANCE LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD.,2. RELIANCE LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD.,3. ASHOK KUMAR - Opp.Party(s)

AJAY RATHEE

09 Sep 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

SONEPAT.

 

 

Complaint No.20 of 2015

Instituted on: 20.01.2015                 

Date of order: 16.09.2015

 

Aruna Devi d/o Jai Parkash, resident of 1305/31, Pragti Nagar, Sonepat.

…Complainant.           Versus

1.Reliance Life Insurance Co. Ltd. Maya Mahal, in front of HDFC Bank, Subhash Chowk, Sonepat, Haryana, through its Branch Manager.

2.Reliance Life Insurance Co. Ltd. 2^nd Floor, Sector 70, Mohali-160060 through its RM/BM.

3.Ashok Kumar, Advisor of Reliance Life Insurance Co. Ltd., r/o village Sewali, tehsil and Distt. Sonepat.

 

                                      …Respondents.

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

Argued by:Sh.Ajay Rathi, Advocate for complainant.

          Respondent no.1 & 2 ex-parte vide order dated

25.05.2015.

          Respondent no.3 ex-parte on 09.09.2015.

 

Before-  Nagender Singh-President. 

          Prabha Wati-Member.

          D.V.Rathi-Member.

 

O R D E R

 

          Complainant has filed the present complaint against the respondents alleging therein that the respondent no.3 explained the complainant about the plan of insurance policy on mobile. The respondent no.3 told the complainant about the plan and to pay premium for three years and after five years, the complainant can withdraw the policy and receive all amount of policy which is mentioned in the policy or surrender the policy after three years and to receive the deposited money plus market value. The complainant accepted the plan of life insurance for three years and pay Rs.10000/- as insurance premium on 9.7.2009.  The complainant was insured by the respondents no.1 and 2 vide policy bearing no.70731493 on 9.7.2009 of the denomination of Rs.50,000/-.  The installment of the above said policy is Rs.10000/- per year for three years. The complainant deposited Rs.10000/- per year for three years i.e. total Rs.30000/- was deposited by the complainant with the respondents no.1 and 2. On 27.8.2014, the complainant went to the office of respondent no.1 and surrender her policy and application in this regard was given to the respondents.  After all formalities, the respondents asked the complainant to come after one week. But after one week, the respondents denied to pay the  amount which was deposited by the complainant before five years and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondents. So, the complainant has come to this Forum and have filed the present complaint.

 

2.        The respondent no.3 has only appeared and has filed the written statement, whereas respondent no.1 and 2 were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 25.05.2015.

 

          In reply, the respondent no.3 has submitted that he had explained to the complainant about the plan of insurance which is only for three years.  She accepted the plan of life insurance for three years and pay the sum of Rs.10000/- for his insurance yearly on 9.7.2009. The complainant was insured by the respondent with policy no.70731493 on 9.7.2009 for Rs.50,000/-. The installment of the said policy is Rs.10000/- per year for three years.  The complainant has deposited Rs.10,000/- per year for years.  There is no deficiency in service on the part of the respondent no.3 and thus, prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

 

          The present case was fixed for 9.9.2015 for evidence of the respondent no.3.  But none has appeared on behalf of the respondent no.3 and due to this, he was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 9.9.2015.

 

3.        We have heard the ex-parte arguments of the  learned counsel for the complainant at length.  All the documents have been perused very carefully and minutely.

 

4.       In the present case, as per document C5, it is not disputed that vide application dated 27.8.2014, the complainant has surrendered her policy.

         Ld. counsel for the complainant has submitted that during the pendency of the case, as per annexure C7, the respondents no.1 and 2 have issued a cheque amount of Rs.24158/- vide cheque no.721952 dated 25.7.2015.  But as per document Annexure C6 (page 2) the fund value of the policy was Rs.27067/-. So, in our view, the respondents no.1 and 2 have paid less amount of Rs.2909/- to the complainant and the complainant is entitled to get Rs.2909/- (Rs.two thousand nine hundred nine) from the respondents no.1 and 2.  Accordingly, we hereby direct the respondents no.1 and 2 to make the payment of Rs. Rs.2909/- (Rs.two thousand nine hundred nine) to the complainant alongwith interest at the rate of nine percent per annum from the date of filing of the present complaint till 25.7.2015 when the cheque of Rs.24158/- was issued to the complainant.

 

 

          With these observations, findings and directions, the present complaint stands allowed qua respondents no.1

and 2.

         Certified copy of this order be provided to

both the parties free of costs.

File be consigned to the record-room.

 

 

 

(Prabha Wati)      (DV Rathi)        (Nagender Singh)

Member, DCDRF       Member, DCDRF,        President

    SNP                SNP                 DCDRF SNP.

 

ANNOUNCED 16.09.2015