BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JALANDHAR.

 Complaint No.538 of 2019

      Date of Instt. 06.11.2019

      Date of Decision: 11.01.2023

Gurvinder Pathania aged about 62 years s/o Jog Raj R/o Vill. Nangal Bihala, Teh. Mukerian, Distt. Hoshiarpur & permanent resident of Home STR 141, Koln 50667, Germany.

..........Complainant

Versus

1.       Aviva Life Insurance Company India Limited, Head Office      Sector Road, Opp. Golf Course DLF, Phase-V, Sector 43,      Gurgaon-122003 through its Managing Director

2.       Aviva Life Insurance Company India Limited, Ladowali Road,          PUDA Complex, Jalandhar-144001 through its Branch Manager.

3.       HDFC Bank Limited (Erstwhile Centurian Bank of Punjab), Near     Narinder Cinema, G. T. Road, Punjab through its Branch   Manager.

4.       HDFC Bank Limited (Erstwhile Centurian Bank of Punjab),    Sutehri Road, Near Govt. College, Hoshiarpur-146001, Punjab          through its Branch Manager.

….….. Opposite Parties

          Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before:        Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj             (President)

                   Smt. Jyotsna                            (Member)

                   Sh. Jaswant Singh Dhillon       (Member)   

Present:       Sh. Manu Jindal, Adv. Counsel for the Complainant.

Defence of OPs No.1 & 2 Struck Off.

Sh. Rahul Pushkarna, Adv. Counsel for OPs No.3 & 4.

Order

Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj (President)

1.                This complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein alleged that the complainant was having an account with OP No.3 for about 10 years and Mr. Jatinder Singh Relationship Manager of the then Centurian Bank of Punjab persuaded the complainant to buy a four years policy of OPs No.1 & 2 and the accrued amount was to be returned after four years with the considerable profit/interest. And eventually on being persuaded by the above said Jatinder Singh, the complainant purchased the policy no. LLG1235961 and paid a premium of Rs.5,00,000/- on 16-06-2006 and then the complainant paid four installments of Rs.5,00,000/- each. That the complainant being the resident of District Hoshiarpur had been directed by the OPs No. 1 to 3 to remain in contact with OP No.4 for any help and since then the transactions of complainant were being conducted by the OP No.4. In the meantime, the Centurian Bank of Punjab merged into HDFC Bank and the complainant approached the officials of the OP No.3 & 4 for number of times and asked them to deliver him the copy of the policy but the officials of the OPs No.1 to 4 intentionally did not supply the copy of the policy and when after the completion of 4 years, the complainant approached the OPs No.1 and 2 to get back his amount, the OPs no. 1 and 2 delivered him a cheque of Rs. 10,00,000/- in the month of July, 2009 and asked him to continue his policy till 16-06-2042 i.e. the alleged last installment date. The complainant was surprised to know the above said version of the OP No.2 and told the OP No.2 that the he is already 59 years old (at that point of time) and how can he pay the installments up to the alleged maturity of the policy i.e. 2042. The Complainant's D.O.B at the time of purchase of Policy was 01-04-1957, he never knew at that time of purchase of policy that he is to continue with the policy up to year 2042 i.e. upto the age of 85 years. This seems unreasonable & contrary to life expectancy formula as per the law of the land. The OPs mislead the complainant and never supplied him with the policy documents. Had it known to the complainant that he has been bound to pay till 2042, he would have never purchased the said policy. The complainant also asked OP No.2 about the reason for not supplying of the copy of the policy, but they never paid heed to it and finally the complainant requested the OP No.2 to return his balance amount i.e. Rs.10,00,000/-(Ten Lakh Only) along with interest and to dissolve the same as the complainant did not want to continue with this policy but the OP No.2 flatly refused to return the remaining amount and to dissolve the policy. After that the complainant through his consultant i.e. Chartered Accountant Navneet Aggarwal requested the OPs No.1 to 4 for number of times to dissolve his policy and to return the remaining amount of Rs.10,00,000/- along with interest, but the OPs No.1 to 3 kept lingering on the matter on one pretext or another. The complainant also sent e-mails to OP No.2 regarding mis-selling of said policy for return of his balance amount paid due to intentional misguidance of OPs, but again they finally refused to return the remaining amount of Rs.10,00,000/- along with interest. The OPs No. I to 4 have not only committed deficiency in services, but have also deceived the complainant and as such, necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OPs be directed to return the entire balance amount of Rs.10,00,000/- alongwith interest @ 12% per annum. Further, OPs be directed to pay a compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- for causing mental tension and harassment to the complainant and Rs.33,000/- as litigation expenses.

2.                Notice of the complaint was given to the OPs and accordingly, OPs No.1 and 2 appeared through its counsel, but they failed to file written statement despite number of opportunities alongwith cost and ultimately, the defecne of the OPs No.1 and 2 was struck off. Whereas OPs No.3 & 4 appeared through its counsel and filed written statement and contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the complainant has concealed true and material facts from this Commission, which are quite necessary for the proper adjudication of the present complaint, in fact the complainant is having Bank Account with the answering opposite party in his name. The present complaint is expressly time barred as the investment made by complainant with AVIVA Life pertains to year 2009 and present complaint has been filed after lapse of about 10 years same is liable to be dismissed. In the year 2006, complainant in order to make investment AVIVA Life Insurance Limited availed the policy offered by them after satisfying himself with the terms and conditions and Risk factors involved in said policies of OP, moreover OP was no where responsible for any inducement with regard to profitability in investments of AVIVA Life insurance Limited and complainant has to exercise his due diligence before opting the scheme of AVIVA Life Insurance Limited. It is pertinent to mention here that complainant has intentionally deposited sum of Rs.500,000 in the policy of AVIVA Life Insurance Limited vide policy No LLG1235961. It is further averred that OP and AVIVA Life Insurance Limited are both separate legal entities, and no official of answering OP induced the complainant for taking any insurance policy and complainant has availed the policy on his own. The answering OP never induced the complainant to avail policy offered by AVIVA Life Insurance Limited and the complainant has agreed with the risk factors of Insurance Policy. It is further averred that the complainant has falsely arraigned the answering OP in present false complaints just to malign the reputation of the complainant and answering OP reserves the right to initiate appropriate legal remedy against the complainant to malign the reputation of the answering OP. The present complaint is not in proper form hence is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone. It is further averred that the present complaint is liable to be dismissed as the complainant has concocted false story in order to harass the OPs and in order to waste the precious times of this Commission to adjudicate on false complaint. On merits, the factum with regard to having an account with the answering OP is admitted, but the other allegations as made in the complaint are categorically denied and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits, the same may be dismissed.

3.                Rejoinder not filed by the complainant.

4.                In order to prove their respective versions, both the parties have produced on the file their respective evidence.

5.                We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and have also gone through the case file very minutely.

6.                The complainant has filed the present complaint on the ground that he had purchased the policy and paid a premium of Rs.5,00,000/- on 16.06.2006 and paid four installments of Rs.5,00,000/- each, but he was never supplied the copy of the policy and after the completion of four years, he approached the OPs No.1 and 2 to get back his amount. The OPs No.1 and 2 delivered him a cheque of Rs.10,00,000/- in the month of July, 2009 and asked him to continue his policy till 16.06.2042 i.e. the last installment date. Though, the complainant has filed on record all the documents, which are the policy receipts from Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-9, which include the emails regarding filing of the complainant for his policy. The OPs No.1 and 2, though the defence of the OPs No.1 and 2 has been struck off, have filed on record the judgments passed by the Hon’ble State Commission and the District Commission, Hoshiarpur and submitted that the complaint is not maintainable in view of the judgments passed by the District Consumer Commission, Hoshiarpur and Hon’ble State Commission. The complainant in his complaint, in Para No.6 has admitted that he had earlier filed a complaint before the Consumer Commission at Hoshiarpur, but the Hon’ble Forum of Hoshiarpur dismissed the complaint on the ground of territorial jurisdiction with the permission to file a fresh having jurisdiction.

7.                Perusal of the certified copies of the complaint filed by the complainant before the Consumer Forum, Hoshiarpur on 06.04.2011 and decided on 06.12.2011 shows that in Para No.6 of the order, the Forum has observed that the complaint filed by the complainant is hit by Section-11 of the Consumer Protection Act as neither the insurance company is doing the business at Hoshiarpur nor it has any branch office here nor any cause of action  arose at Hoshiarpur, but the District Forum has not dismissed the complaint on this score only rather the Hon’ble Forum has given observation on the merits of the complaint also. The complaint of the complainant was dismissed on merits vide order dated 06.12.2011 and as per this order, the complainant was never given permission to file a fresh complaint within the appropriate jurisdiction. The order of the District Forum, Hoshiarpur was challenged by the complainant before the Hon’ble State Commission, Chandigarh by the complainant/Gurmail Singh through attorney Gurvinder Pathania. The first appeal of the complainant was dismissed by the Hon’ble State Commission on 23.11.2015 and the order of the District Forum, Hoshiarpur dated 06.12.2011 was confirmed. Once the matter has already been decided by the District Forum and the Hon’ble State Commission and no permission was granted to the complainant to file fresh complaint on the point of the jurisdiction or for filing the same having proper jurisdiction, the present complaint is not maintainable and thus, the same is dismissed with no order of cost. Parties will bear their own costs. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.

8.                Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.

Dated          Jaswant Singh Dhillon    Jyotsna               Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj     

11.01.2023         Member                          Member           President