BY - SRI ASISH DEB, PRESIDENT
1. The brief factual matrix leading to the complainant’s case is that Complainant has permanent residence within this Jurisdiction and offices of the Opposite Parties are within this jurisdiction. The Opposite Party No.1-3 are one of the leading financial company and O.P. No.-06 was one of the Policy holder under O.P.1 and 3 vide Policy No. 458659687 of Max Life Insurance (Formerly known as Max New York) since 04.03.2008 (Policy issuing date) of Rupees 10,000/- per annum for a period of Ten Years and O.P. 4 and 5 are the corporate agent of the O.P. 1-3. O.P. NO.6 who is a friend and well acquainted person of complainant met with some financial crisis during the year 2013, asked and requested complainant to continue the said policy in her own name in lieu of sufficient monetary consideration to which complainant agreed and thus the O.P. No.6 made an assignment of the said policy in the name of complainant. It is to be noted after complainant agreed to the O.P.-6 proposal and she complied all the formalities to assign the said policy in her favour. On 11.07.2013 complainant received a letter from O.Ps saying “Greetings from Max Life Insurance Company and wish you good health and prosperity. This is with reference to your request for assignment for policy No. 458659687 We confirm the policy has been assigned in favour of Mrs. Swapna Raul effective from May 17,2013” (Copy of the Policy is attached herewith). Since then the complainant has been paying the premium amount to the O.P1 for the remaining years without fail and the O.P. 6 was nowhere in the picture. On 04.03.2018 the said insurance Policy got matured and after not being paid on the specified time the complainant reported the matter to the O.P. with all the documents but till now they did not pay return any amount to the complainant. Complainant several times meet the O.P.1 branch and the O.P. orally assured the complainant they will disbursed the amount but in vain. After several visits to the O.P. the complainant preferred an application to the O.P.2 but they did not take any step till now. After several times requested by the complainant no fruitful result came out from the O.Ps side and O.Ps are harassing unnecessarily and intentionally not to disburse the claim amount the complainant till now. Suddenly the complainant was stunned to notice from the records of O.P. No.1-2 that the said maturity amount has been disbursed in the name of the O.P. No.6 vide cheque (Axis Bank) Haldia No. 656644 dt. 05.03.2018 and the O.P. 6 with malafide intention and to have unlawful gain, has realized the same by encasing the full. The complainant feels mental pain and agony due to unnecessary harassment and non payment of claim amount by the said O.Ps. The complainant also submits that O.P. members are not interested in settling genuine and legitimate claims of the complainant which has caused grave loss and untold hardship to complainant for which O.Ps are responsible. The whole act done by the Opposite Party’s end is not only illegal and against the settled principle of Law but also tantamount to sheer deficiency in rendering service and negligence causing serious mental agony and economical loss to me. The cause of action arose on and from 04.03.2018 i.e. since the date of the maturity. In the aforesaid circumstances, the complainant has been constrained to take shelter of law. One demand draft of Rs. 200/- submitted by the complainant along with this Complaint. The complainant prays for directing the ops to pay the matured amount of Rs. 1,36,205.19/- (Rupees One lakh Thirty Six Thousand two hundred five and nineteen paisa) with 10% interest to the complainant till realization. To pay a compensation of Rs. 20,000/- to the complainant for mental agony. To pay a litigation cost of Rs. 10,000/- to the complainant for conduct of this case. To give other relief to the complainant which the commission may deem fit and proper.
2. Upon notice the ops no1 & 3 have contested the case by filing written version against the complaint. Ops 2,4,5 7 & 6 have not contested the case. In their written version ops 1& 3 have stated inter alia that the allegation of the complainant, which are contrary to or inconsistent with what is averred herein are denied in totality and that nothing in the complaint is or should be deemed to be admitted by or on behalf of the answering opposite parties for want of specific traverse or otherwise. The complainant has with malafide and dishonest intention twisted and distorted the facts of the case to suit his convenience and to mislead this Hon’ble Forum. The complaint therefore deserved no fate other than outright dismissal. The complainant has failed to neither demonstrate any deficiency in services nor have attributed any fault, imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality, nature and manner of performance; which is required to be maintained in pursuance of a contract. There is no deficiency in services on the part of the answering Opposite Party while rendering service to the Insured nor were the answering Opposite Party indulged into any unfair trade practice while foreclosing the policy. It is humbly submitted that the amount was credited to the previous holder of the policy erroneously. The Ops submit that as soon as the letter of the complainant dated 22.05.2018 was received by the Ops, the Ops promptly couriered a reply to the same and are ever willing to disburse the maturity amount to the complainant. It is further submitted that Rs. 50,000/- has already been paid to the Complainant by the previous policy holder and the remaining amount of Rs. 86,266.64/- shall be refunded to the Complainant soon by the previous Policy Holder. Therefore there is no cause of action in the present complaint. It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Forum may kindly be pleased to dismiss the complaint of the Complainant with exemplary cost in favour of the answering Opposite Party and against the Complainant, in the interest of Justice or pass any other order(s) or direction which this Hon’ble Forum deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
- Points for determination are:
- Is the case maintainable in its present form and in law?
- Is the complainant entitled to the relief(s) as soughtfor?
Decision with reasons
4.Both the points, being inter related to each other, are taken up together for discussion for sake of brevity and convenience.
5. Heard arguments of the Learned Counsel for both parties. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the arguments from both sides. We have carefully perused and assessed the affidavit of the complainant which has been treated as evidence, written version filed by ops-1 & 3, and other annexures.
6. Having regards had to the bundle of facts and circumstances of the case and other materials on record, it appears that the complainant is a consumer; as such the instant case is maintainable in its present form and in law.
7. On evaluation of the materials on record it is evident that the complainant is insured with the OPs 1 & 3 by valid assigned insurance policy .This factum has been affirmed by the OPs 1 & 3 by its letter dated July 11 ,2013. The version of the said letter is saying “Greetings from Max Life Insurance Company and wish you good health and prosperity. This is with reference to your request for assignment for policy No. 458659687 We confirm the policy has been assigned in favour of Mrs. Swapna Raul effective from May 17,2013” .
8. Now, the version of the ops 1& 3 are that it is humbly submitted that the amount was credited to the account of previous holder of the policy erroneously. The Ops submit that as soon as the letter of the complainant dated 22.05.2018 was received by the Ops, the Ops promptly couriered a reply to the same and are ever willing to disburse the maturity amount to the complainant. It is further submitted that Rs. 50,000/- has already been paid to the Complainant by the previous policy holder and the remaining amount of Rs. 86,266.64/- shall be refunded to the Complainant soon by the previous Policy Holder. In course of contested argument Ld Counsel for the Complainant informed that during pendency of the case the complainant received Rs, 50,000/- from op-6.
9. So, it appears that the complainant got Rs.50,000/- from op-6. Now crux or fulcrum of the dispute among the parties rests upon the aspect as to who would pay /refund the remaining amount of Rs. 86,266.64/-.Here ,ops1 & 3 who admittedly stated the amount was credited to the account of previous holder of the policy erroneously. The error was committed by the ops1 & 3. The complainant has no nexus with the said error; there was no fault or error on the part of the complainant. The ops 1& 3 would have taken take legal step if so advised against the Op-6. It is not appreciable as to why the complainant should suffer for the fault of ops-1 & 3. The act and omission on the part of the ops-1 & 3 have surely set an instance of deficiency of service. The complainant is being harassed un necessarily causing mental agony. They are wholly liable for setting the law into motion by the complainant. Therefore, the complainant is entitled to get Rs. 86,266.64/- alongwith simple interest @ 8 % per annum over the said amount from the date of filing of this case till the date of actual payment ,Rs. 5000/-as towards compensation for harassment and Rs.3000/- as towards litigation costs from OPs 1 & 3.
10. Both the points are decided accordingly in favour of the complainant.
11. Resultantly, the complaint case succeeds.
12. Hence, it is
O R D E R E D
13. That the CC/489 of 2018 be and the same is allowed on contest against the Opposite parties 1 & 3 and dismissed ex-parte against OPs No-2 4, 5 & 6.
14. The Opposite parties 1 & 3, who are jointly and severally liable, are hereby directed to pay Rs. 86,266.64/- alongwith simple interest @ 8 % per annum over the said amount from the date of filing of this case till the date of actual payment, Rs. 5000/-as towards compensation for harassment and Rs.3000/- as towards litigation costs to the complainant within 45 days from the date of this order in default the complainant will be at liberty to put the order into execution.
15. Let a copy of this judgment be provided to the Complainant and ops-1 & 3 free of cost.
16. The judgment be uploaded forthwith on the website of the Commission for the perusal of the parties.
17. File be consigned to record section along with a copy of this judgment.
