DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

C.C. NO. 815/12

Smt. Ritu Jindal

W/o Shri Naresh Kumar Jindal

R/o 3-B, Pocket-E

DDA LIG Flats, GTB Enclave

Nand Nagari, Delhi – 110 093                                                    ….Complainant

Vs.

M/s. Aviva Life Insurance Co. India Ltd.

Through its Branch Manager

Branch Office:

Branch – 5, Preet Vihar

Delhi                                                                                                  ….Opponent

Date of Institution: 08.11.2012

Judgment Reserved for : 08.08.2016

Judgment Passed on : 22.08.2016

CORUM:

Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)

Dr. P.N. Tiwari  (Member)

Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

Order By : Shri Sukhdev Singh (President)

JUDGEMENT

The complainant Smt. Ritu Jindal has filed a complaint under Section 12(a) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 (hereinafter to be referred as Act), against M/s. Aviva Life Insurance Co. India Ltd. for refund of          Rs. 3,50,000/-, amount deposited by her and Rs. 2,00,000/- as  compensation. 

2.        The facts in brief are that in the first week of March, 2008, OP through their agents induced the complainant at her home stating that OP was very reputed and if the complainant deposited her life savings in their insurance policy plan, the deposited money will be secured and protected.   On this inducement, the complainant deposited her life savings amount to Rs. 20,00,000/- with OP in 20 years by depositing half yearly premium of Rs. 50,000/-  each.  It is stated that she used to deposit the money from time to time and she deposited premium amounts with the OP for a total sum of Rs. 3,50,000/-.  When she made enquiries, she came to know that OP illegally, unlawfully and unjustifiably adjusted the entire premium of Rs. 1,00,000/- for the first year as allocation charges.  This act of the OP was illegal, arbitrary, unjustified, violative of the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority Act, Insurance Act and Rules, RBI Guidelines, MRTP etc. etc.  Thus, it is stated that OP have failed to provide the services for which insurer/OP have under obligation to provide as per the guidelines of statutory bodies as well as Govt. of India which clearly showed the deficiency in services on insurer/OP.  It has further been stated that she sent a representation dated 06.08.12 on 07.08.12 through registered post, which was replied by OP on 23.08.2012 , which was totally false, vague and baseless.  Thus, she has prayed that OP be directed to release a sum of Rs. 3,50,000/- which was deposited by the complainant along with interest; Rs. 2,00,000/- compensation on account of mental agony and sufferings alongwith cost of the complaint. 

3.        In the WS, OPs have taken various preliminary objections stating that the grievances of the complainant were ill-founded and frivolous.  The insurance policy availed by the complainant was a Save Guard policy which was unit linked investment product.  It is stated that for the first year, Rs. 1,00,000/-  was towards allocation charges.  No premium was allocated to the fund in the first year.  They have acted within the terms and conditions of the policy.  On merits, it has been stated that the complainant has not filed on record the “Key Feature Document”.  The complainant was not entitled to the relief as the claim was barred by Law of Estoppel and she was bound by the terms of the policy.  She has concealed the material facts.  Other pleas have also been denied. 

            The complainant has filed rejoinder to the WS of OP, wherein she has controverted the pleas taken in the WS and reasserted her pleas.

4.        In support of its complaint, the complaint has examined herself who has deposed on affidavit.  She has narrated the facts which have been stated in the complaint. 

            In defence, OP have examined Shri Watan Kumar Bhajanka, Attorney of M/s. Aviva Life Insurance Company India Ltd., who has deposed on affidavit.  He has also narrated the facts, which have been stated in the WS.   He has also got exhibited the documents such as copy of power of attorney (RW1/1), copy of “Policy Schedule”, “Key Feature Document” and “Standard Terms & Conditions” (RW1/2), copy of the ‘Right to Reconsider’ (RW1/3), Premium quotation and illustration (RW1/4), Statement of premium deposited by the complainant (RW1/5) and Complainants’ representation (RW1/6).

5.        We have heard the Ld. Counsel for the parties.  During the course of arguments, it has been stated on behalf of the complainant that they have received the payment and their prayer was limited only to the extent of damages claimed on account of mental agony and sufferings.  Though, the complainant has received the principle amount which she has claimed in the complaint, the fact that amount has been received by the complainant during the course of proceedings, certainly she has suffered mental agony and pain on account of deficiency in service on the part of OP.  That being so, it would be in the fittest of things if the complainant is awarded an amount of Rs. 20,000/- on account of mental agony and pain as well as cost of proceedings.

6.        In view of the above, it is ordered that M/s. Aviva Life Insurance Company India Ltd. (OP) will make a payment of Rs. 20,000/- to the complainant within a period of 30 days from the receipt of the order.  If the payment is not made within the specified period, the complainant shall be entitled to recover the same with interest @ 9% from the date of filing the complaint till realisation.

            Copy of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules.

File be consigned to Record Room.

(DR. P.N. TIWARI)                                                  (HARPREET KAUR CHARYA)

Member                                                                                Member                 

    (SUKHDEV SINGH)

             President