West Bengal

StateCommission

A/761/2016

DHFL Pramerica Life Insurance Co. Ltd. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Amal Jana - Opp.Party(s)

Mr. Arijit Basu

03 Jan 2019

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
WEST BENGAL
11A, Mirza Ghalib Street, Kolkata - 700087
 
First Appeal No. A/761/2016
( Date of Filing : 23 Aug 2016 )
(Arisen out of Order Dated 18/04/2016 in Case No. Complaint Case No. CC/36/2016 of District Kolkata-II(Central))
 
1. DHFL Pramerica Life Insurance Co. Ltd.
Regd. office - 4th Floor, Building 9B, Cyber City, DLF City Phase-III, Gurgaon - 122 002.
2. DHFL Pramerica Life Insurance Co. Ltd.
Br. office - 10th Floor, Pace, Sector - 1/1, Mahendra Roy Lane, Kolkata - 700 046.
3. DHFL Pramerica Life Insurance Co. Ltd.
4, N.C. Dutta Sarani, Clive Ghat Row, U.B.I. Building First Floor, opp., Sagar Estate Dalhousie, Kolkata - 700 001.
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. Amal Jana
R/o Naba Pally, Colony More, P.O. - Naba Pally, Dist. - North 24 Pgs., Kolkata - 700 126.
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. SHYAMAL GUPTA PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. UTPAL KUMAR BHATTACHARYA MEMBER
 
For the Appellant:Mr. Arijit Basu, Advocate
For the Respondent:
Dated : 03 Jan 2019
Final Order / Judgement

Sri Shyamal Gupta, Member

This Appeal is moved by DHFL Pramerica Life Insurance Co. Ltd. against the Order dated 18-04-2016, passed by the Ld. District Forum, Kolkata-II (Central) in CC No. 36/2016, whereof the complaint case has been allowed.

In a nutshell, case of the Complainant was that, he fell victim of the sinister designs of the authorized agent of the OP Insurance Company, who, mis-sold him the insurance product of the OPs.  As soon as he detected the anomaly in the policy concerned, he approached the concerned agent for doing the needful.  However, as nothing positive was done despite repeated assurance, he lodged complaint with the OP Insurance Company and sought refund of the deposited sum.  However, the OP refused to oblige him citing technicalities involved in the matter. In view of this, the complaint case was filed.

The case was not contested by the OPs.

Decision with reasons

Postal AD Card on record shows that notice was duly received by the Respondent.  However, as he did not appear before us, the Appeal was heard ex parte.

On going through the impugned order, we come across several inconsistencies with the order impugned, e.g., though the case was not contested by the Appellants, it was shown as a contested case.

Be that as it may, the facts and circumstances of the case being identical vis-à-vis Appeal No. A/762/2016, we are not remanding the case to the Ld. District Forum and in the light of our findings in the said Appeal, we deem it appropriate to modify the impugned order.

The Appeal, thus, succeeds in part.

Hence,

O R D E R E D

The Appeal stands allowed ex parte in part against the Respondent.  The impugned order is modified as under:

Appellants shall refund the sum of Rs. 36,260/- to the Respondent after deducting 5% of the premium amount as service charge within 40 days from this day, i.d., simple interest @ 9% p.a. over the aforesaid sum shall be payable to the Respondent from the date of filing of the complaint case till full and final payment is made.

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. SHYAMAL GUPTA]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
[HON'BLE MR. UTPAL KUMAR BHATTACHARYA]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.