Per Shri S.R. Khanzode, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member
These two appeals are disposed of by this common order since they are arising out of one and the same order. One is filed by the complainant and another filed by the opponent and involved common question of facts and law. Appeal No.1014/2004 is filed by org. complainant since not satisfied with the impugned order given in his favour by the District Consumer Forum while Appeal No.912/2004 is filed by org. opponent after feeling aggrieved by the order. Both these appeals arise out of order dated 28/04/2004 passed in consumer complaint No.180/2000 Asif Akhtar Abdul Kadir Shaikh V/s. Life Insurance Corporation of India Ltd., passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Nashik (hereinafter referred as ‘the Forum’ for brevity).
2. It is the case of the complainant-Asif Akhtar Abdul Kadir Shaikh that though he had asked for “Ashadeep-II” policy, the Insurance Company issued him “Jeevan Mitra” policy. He, therefore, made a grievance after receiving the policy document to the Insurance Company, but in vain and therefore, he filed consumer complaint inter alia claiming relief for direction to the Insurance Company to issue him Ashadeep-II policy effective from 14/02/1998 and also to give him the benefits under Ashadeep-II policy. He further claimed compensation for issuing wrong policy quantifying same at `1 Lakh. He also claimed cost of `3,000/- which he incurred for visiting the Insurance Company and `2,000/- as cost of the proceeding. The Forum directed the Insurance Company to issue the complainant Ashadeep-II policy effective from the date of the impugned order and also awarded compensation of `1,000/- for mental torture and `1,000/- as costs. Not satisfied with the said order since the policy was directed to be issued from the date of impugned order, the complainant preferred an appeal, supra, while feeling aggrieved by the said order, Insurance Company preferred an appeal as stated earlier.
3. We heard Ms.Trupti Jambhale, Advocate i/b. Mr.Harihar Bhave, Advocate for the appellant and Mr.Santosh Patil, Advocate for the respondent/org. complainant.
4. Admittedly, the proposal form does not refer to any specific policy particularly, Ashadeep-II policy. Furthermore, as it appears from the record and as submitted by both the parties that the Insurance Company on receiving the proposal form, accepted the proposal to issue Jeevan Mitra policy and accordingly issued the same. On receipt of policy document on 23/08/1999 the complainant had written the Zonal Manager, LIC, Mumbai, whereby he admitted that the Agent had informed him that the Zonal Office rejected Ashadeep-II plan of the insurance policy to the complainant, but he further mentioned that said Agent further informed him that if he gives consent, policy under other plan can be issued. Referring to such representation in the said letter dated 23/08/1999 he requested the Insurance Company to issue Ashadeep-II policy. Complainant had written another letter dated 22/12/1999 inviting attention of the Insurance Company to his earlier letter. According to the complainant, those letters did not meet any expected response and therefore, he filed consumer complaint.
5. It is well settled law that the Consumer Fora has to confine itself for its empowerment to grant relief within the parameters as spelled out in Section 14 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. It cannot direct the Insurance Company to substitute the insurance contract to issue new insurance policy viz. Ashadeep-II. The relief claimed is virtually seeking direction in the form of mandatory injunction directing the Insurance Company to issue to the complainant Ashadeep-II policy will not fall within the ambit of Section 14 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and such cannot be a consumer dispute. The Forum erroneously held accordingly and arrived at wrong conclusion. In this background, even prayer of the complainant in his appeal to issue Ashadeep-II policy with the date as prayed in the complaint, supra, will also not stand in the eyes of law. We hold accordingly and pass the following order:-
-: ORDER :-
1. Appeal No.1014/2004 stands dismissed.
2. Appeal No.912/2004 is allowed and the impugned order dated 28/04/2004 is quashed and set aside and in the result, consumer complaint No.180/2000 stands dismissed.
3. In the given circumstances, in the both the appeals, parties are left to bear their own costs.
4. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties.
Pronounced
Dated 2nd September 2011.
