THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR

Consumer Complaint No. 27 of 2014

Date of Institution : 21.1.2014

Date of Decision : 17.06.2015

S. Joginder Singh Dhall S/o S. Prem Singh r/o 331, E-Block, Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar

...Complainant

Vs.

Aegon Religare Life Insurance Limited having their branch office at Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar through its branch manager/principal officer, Amritsar

....Opp.party

Complaint under section 12/13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Present : For the complainant : Sh.Vikram Puri,Advocate

For the opposite party : Sh.Sunil Nayyar,Advocate

Quorum : Sh. Bhupinder Singh, President ,Ms. Kulwant Bajwa,Member &

Sh.Anoop Sharma,Member

Order dictated by :-

Bhupinder Singh, President

1 Present complaint has been filed by Joginder Singh Dhall under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act alleging therein that he was approached by the representative of the opposite party who allured him to obtain insurance policy which are single premium policy . On the assurance of the representative of the opposite party, complainant got two insurance policies in the name on payment of

-2-

premium of Rs. 61999/- of both the policies. Complainant has alleged that he received one police bearing No. 120113403112 of premium of Rs. 25,499/-and he came to know that the said policy is of term 16 years and premium payment term of 10 years instead of single premium policy. Complainant has further alleged that he has not received the second policy for premium of Rs. 36500/- i.e. policy bearing No. 120313474201. The complainant moved an application dated 30.5.2012 to the opposite party and the opposite party sent letter dated 4.6.2012 sought some information from the complainant with signature verified from the bank which the complainant submitted all the documents. After coming to know about the wrong policy issued by the opposite party, complainant contacted the opposite party and requested them either to convert the annual premium policy into single premium policy and issue the second policy to him or to refund the amount of Rs. 61999/- but the opposite party refused to listen to the complainant. Alleging the same to be deficiency in service complaint was filed seeking directions to the opposite party either to issue fresh policy with single premium or to refund the entire amount deposited by the complainant alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. From the date of issuing of policy till payment. Compensation of Rs. 30000/- alongwith

litigation expenses were also demanded.

2. On notice opposite party appeared and filed written version in which it was submitted that in order to obtain the policies in the name of his son Jagdeep Singh,

-3-

the complainant filled in and signed the proposal forms bearing No. EF1335489 dated 21.1.2012 for an annual premium of Rs. 25499/- the sum assured was Rs. 2,13,930/- with premium paying term was 10 years and policy term was 16 years and EF1349170 dated 16.3.2012 with premium of Rs. 36500/-, sum assured was Rs. 2,86,595/- , premium payment term was 12 years and policy term was 16 years. On receipt of the aforesaid applications two policies bearing No. 120113403112 and 120313474201 were issued to the insured on 29.1.2012 and 20.3.2012 and the same were delivered at the address of the complainant via AWB No. 44943345823 and 40358632963 . It was submitted that complainant had signed the said applications on his own will and consent and also made the following declaration in this respect:-

“I (We) declare that the sales literature and illustrations in relation to the product proposed to be purchased by me/us have been provided and explained to me/us and I/we have understood the same.”

3. It was submitted that each policyholder is apprisd about the option of free look period of 15 days through a welcome letter and under the free look option, if the policyholder finds any discrepancy in the policy terms and conditions sent to him, he may exercise the free look option by informing the company in writing. However, the complainant did not avail the free look period option within the stipulated time. As the first complaint was lodged by the complainant on 30.5.2012

-4-

for cancellation of the policies which was beyond free look period and the same was replied vide letter dated 3.7.2012, , as such the complainant is not liable for refund of premium. While denying and controverting other allegations dismissal of complaint was prayed.

4. Complainant tendered his affidavit Ex.C-1, copy of duplicate policy Ex.C-2, proposal form Ex.C-3, copy of policy Ex.C-4, copy of letter dated 13.6.2012 Ex.C-5, copy of bank certificate Ex.C-6, copy of premium receipt Ex.C-7, copy of premium receipt Ex.C-8, copy of letter dated 30.5.2012 Ex.C-9.

5. Opposite party tendered affidavit of Sh. Manish Falor Ex.OP1, copy of authority letter Ex.OP2, copy of proposal form Ex.OP3 alongwith guidelines, copy of proposal form alongwith guidelines Ex.OP4, copy of welcome letter Ex.OP5, copy of welcome letter Ex.OP6, copy of letter dated 30.5.2012 Ex.OP7, copy of letter dated 3.7.2012 Ex.OP8, copy of letter dated 18.12.2012 Ex.OP9.

6. We have carefully gone through the pleadings of the parties, arguments advanced by the ld.counsel for the complainant and opposite party No.1 and have appreciated the evidence produced on record by both the parties with the valuable assistance of the ld.counsel for the parties.

7. From the record i.e. pleadings of the parties and the evidence produced on record by both the parties , it is clear that complainant got two insurance policies in the name of his son Jagdeep Singh from the opposite party on payment of premium

-5-

of Rs. 61999/- of both the policies. The complainant submitted that the representative of the opposite party told the complainant that both the polices shall be single premium policies. The complainant alleges that he received one policy bearing No. 120113403112 of premium of Rs. 25,499/-. Then the complainant came to know that the said policy is of term 16 years and premium payment term of 10 years instead of single premium policy. Whereas the complainant did not receive the second policy of premium of Rs. 36500/- i.e. policy bearing No. 120313474201. The complainant filed application dated 30.5.2012 Ex.C-9 to the opposite party. Then the opposite sent letter dated 4.6.2012 Ex.C-4 to the complainant vide which the opposite party required certain documents from the complainant and the complainant sent the said documents to the opposite party vide letter dated 13.6.2012 Ex.C-5. However, the complainant came to know that the policy issued by the opposite party is not single premium policy and the second policy documents were not sent to the complainant, so the complainant requested the opposite party to refund the amount of premium of both the policies to the complainant. But the opposite party did not pay any heed to the request of the complainant. Ld.counsel for the complainant submitted that all this amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party.

8. Whereas the case of the opposite party is that in order to obtain the policies in the name of his son Jagdeep Singh, the complainant filled in and signed the

-6-

proposal form Ex.C-3/Ex.OP3 and proposal form Ex.OP4 in which most of the terms and conditions of the policy i.e. term of the policy, premium payment term of the policy, sum assured and the amount of premium with premium payment frequency have been mentioned. Not only this the complainant signed the declaration that the sales literature and illustrations in relation to the product proposed to be purchased by him have been provided and explained to him and he understood the same. On the basis of aforesaid proposal form, the opposite party issued policies bearing No. 120113403112 and 120313474201 to the insured on 29.1.2012 and 20.3.2012 through speed post via AWB No. 44943345823 and 40358632963 at the address of the complainant mentioned in the proposal forms i.e. H.No. 331, E-Block, Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar, Punjab and the same were delivered at the address of the complainant/life assured on 6.2.2012 and 24.3.2012 respectively. If the complainant was not satisfied with the terms and conditions of the policy, he could opt for cancellation of the policy within free look period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the policy documents. However, the complainant did not avail free look option within the stipulated period. However, the complainant applied for the first time for the cancellation of the policy on 30.5.2012 vide letter Ex.C-9 i.e. after the lapse of a period of more than two months, as such the opposite party sent letter dated 3.7.2012 Ex.OP8 to the complainant telling the complainant that as he has not applied for option of

-7-

cancellation of the policy within the stipulated period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the policy documents, so they regret to accede the request of the complainant for cancellation of the policy. The complainant was again informed in this regard vide letter dated 18.12.2012 Ex.OP9. Ld.counsel for the opposite party submitted that in these circumstances there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party qua the complainant.

9. From the entire above discussion, we have come to the conclusion that complainant has got two policies bearing No. 120113403112 in the name of his son Jagdeep Singh from the opposite party. In this regard the complainant filled in and signed the proposal forms Ex.C-3/OP3 and Ex.OP4 in which most of the terms and conditions of the policy i.e. term of the policy, premium payment term, sum assured, amount of premium with premium payment frequency, etc. have been mentioned. The complainant also signed the declaration under this proposal form to the effect that the sales literature and illustrations in relation to the product proposed to be purchased by him , have been provided and explained to him and he understood the same. On the basis of the aforesaid proposal form , the opposite party issued policies bearing No.120113403112 and No.120313474201 to the insured on 29.1.2012 and 20.3.2012 through speed post via AWB No. 44943345823 and 40358632963 at the address of the complainant given by the complainant himself in the proposal forms i.e. H.No. 331, E-Block, Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar,

-8-

Punjab and the same were delivered at the aforesaid address of the complainant on 6.2.2012 and 24.3.2012. The complainant admitted that he received one policy bearing No. 120113403112 but he did not mention the date, month or year when he received the said policy from the opposite party at the aforesaid given address of the complainant and he stated that he did not receive the second policy bearing No. 120313474201. Both the policies were issued by the opposite party to the complainant at the aforesaid given address of the complainant through speed post. So it cannot be believed that one policy has been received by the complainant, whereas the other policy was not received by the complainant whereas the opposite party has categorically stated that the second policy was also sent through the same mode i.e. speed post via AWB No. 40358632963 and that too at the same given address of the complainant which were delivered to the complainant on 6.2.2012 and 24.3.2012. Further the complainant has not written any letter to the opposite party that he has not received the policy bearing No. 120313474201. So this Forum has come to the conclusion that the complainant has received both the policies which were delivered to the complainant on 6.2.2012 and 24.3.2012. If the complainant was not satisfied with the terms and conditions of the policy, he could opt for cancellation of the policy within free look period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the policy documents. But the complainant did not avail the said free look option within the stipulated period. However, complainant applied for the first

-9-

time for the cancellation of the policies on 30.5.2012 vide letter Ex.C-9 i.e. after a lapse of a period of more than two months. Opposite party sent letter dated 3.7.2012 Ex.OP8 to the complainant telling the complainant that he has not applied for cancellation of the policies within the stipulated period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the policy documents, so they rejected the request of the complainant for cancellation of the policy. The complainant was again informed in this regard vide letter dated 18.12.2012 Ex.OP9 as the complainant did not opt for cancellation of the policy within free look period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the policy documents, opposite party was justified in rejecting the request of the complainant for the cancellation of the policies. Therefore, the complainant has failed to prove on record any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party qua the complainant.

10. Resultantly we hold that complaint is without merit and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room. Complaint could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases

in this Forum.

17.6.2015 (Bhupinder Singh)

President

(Anoop Sharma) (Kulwant Kaur Bajwa)

/R/ Member Member