`BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPTUES REDRESSAL FORUM, FATEHABAD.
Complaint no.177/2015.
Date of instt.25.08.2015.
Date of Decision: 24.10.2017.
Smt. Mamta Raheja wife of Parminder Singh, resident of 22-2. Model Town, Fatehabad, Tehsil and District Fatehabad.
..Complainant.
Versus
1.AVIVA Life Insurance Company, Red Square Market, Hisar, Tehsil & District Hisar through its Branch Manager.
2.Kuldeep Singh, Agent Code No.PSHP0148 office of AVIVA Life Insurance Company Limited, Red Square Market, Hisar, Tehsil and District Hisar.
..Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
Before Sh.Raghbir Singh, President.
Sh.R.S.Panghal, Member.
Smt.Ansuya Bishnoi, Member.
Present : Sh.R.K.Panwar, Advocate for complainant.
Sh.U.K.Gera, Advocate for the OP No.1.
OP No.2 already ex-parte.
ORDER
The present complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has been filed by the complainant with the averments that the complainant had taken an insurance policy bearing No.ELP1856948 from OP No.1 for a sum of Rs.1 lac. The date of commencement of the policy was 05.02.2008 and the same was valid for 10 years. The complainant made a payment of insurance premium amounting to Rs.10,000/- to the OP1. Therefore the complainant is the consumer of the OPs as defined in The Consumer Protection Act, 1986. It is further submitted that the complainant made payment of second installment of insurance premium of Rs.10000/- on 10.03.2009. The next premium due date was 05.02.2010 and the complainant got prepared a bank draft from her bank account No.SBI-13660 vide draft No. 0733992/2024 on 23.03.2010 and handed over the same to OP No.2 who assured the complainant that the bank draft will be handed over to OP No.1. The complainant was also assured by OP no.2 that her insurance policy will remain continued. It is further submitted that the complainant has been asking the OPs to receive from the complainant the insurance premium in respect of the next installment. However the OPs avoided the matter on one pretext or the other and now the OPs have sent the messages on 25.07.2015 and 29.07.2015 on her mobile number vide which it has been informed that Cheque No.872962 has been issued for closure of her policy which has already been lapsed. It is further submitted that on inquiry the complainant came to know that the above said policy of the complainant has been discontinued by the OP No.1. Thereafter also the complainant has been repeatedly asking the OPs to take the remaining installments and continue the insurance policy of the complainant, but all in vain and the OP No.1 flatly refused to do so. The complainant has also further requested to the OP No.1 that in case the OP No.1 is not interested to continue the insurance policy in that eventuality a payment of Rs.30,000/- deposited by the complainant with the OP No.1 be disbursed to the complainant along-with interest at the rate of 18% per annum. It is also further submitted that the action of the OPs in discontinuing the insurance policy of the complainant and also not refunding the amount of Rs.30,000/- along-with interest amounts to deficiency and unfair trade practice on their part in rendering service to the complainant. Hence this complaint.
2. On notice the OP no.1 appeared and resisted the complaint by filing a written statement wherein various preliminary objections have been raised i.e. the present complaint is groundless, wholly misconceived, unsustainable and baseless; that the present complaint is barred by the principles of Estoppel, Waiver and Acquiesces; that the complaint is not maintainable in the present Forum; that the complainant has got no locus-standi to file the present complaint; that the complainant is estopped by her act and conduct to file the present complaint; that the complainant does not fall within the definition of consumer as provided in Consumer Protection Act, 1986; that the no cause of action has arisen in favour of complainant to file the present complaint; that the present complaint is bad for mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties; that the complainant has not come in this Forum with clean hands and has suppressed the true and material fact. On merits, it is submitted that the complainant took the insurance policy in question on 05.02.2008 and thereafter she made payment of two annual installment of premium and failed to pay the third annual installment. Therefore the company closed the insurance policy of the complainant. It is further submitted that there is no policy for refund of amount if third premium instrument is not realized in favour of the company. The action of the company in closing the insurance policy of the complainant is perfectly in accordance with the terms and conditions of the policy and as such she is not entitled for any relief from the OPs therefore the present complaint is devoid of any merit and the same is liable to be dismissed.
3. That despite proper service the OP No.2 did not appear in the Forum and as such he was proceeded ex-parte on 08.05.2017.
4. In evidence the complainant produced her affidavit as Annexure CW1 wherein the averments made in the complaint have been affirmed. The complainant also tendered documents Annexure C1 to Annexure C8 in support of her case and closed the evidence. On the other hand the OP No.1 tendered in evidence documents Annexure R1 to Annexure R6 and closed its evidence.
5. We have heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the documents placed on record of the case file. It is the case of the complainant that she had taken an insurance policy of Rs.1 lac from the OP No.1 and made a payment of Rs.10,000/- at the time of commencement of the policy. Thereafter she made a payment of Rs.10,000/- as 2nd installment of premium on 10.03.2009. The next due date of payment of premium was 05.02.2010 and the complainant got prepared a Bank-Draft from her Bank Account vide draft No. 0733992/2024 on 23.03.2010 and handed over the same to OP No.2 to deposit the same with OP No.1. In this way all the first, three installments of premium were deposited by the complainant with the OP No.1. However the OP No.1 wrongly and illegally discontinued the above said insurance policy of the complainant. The same amount to unfair trade practice on the part of OP No.1 in rendering service to the complainant. Therefore the OPs are liable either to continue the policy or refund the total amount of Rs.30,000/- deposited by the complainant along-with interest. On the other hand it is the case of the Op No.1 that the complainant had made payments of two annual premiums only and the payment of third premium which was due on 05.02.2010, was not made by her. Therefore the policy of the complainant was lapsed and after expiry of the re-installment period the said policy was closed. The complainant was duly given information regarding the same vide letter dated 13.02.2012. Since the complainant had deposited only two installments and the 3rd annual installment was not deposited as such as per terms and conditions of the policy the complainant was not entitled for refund of the amount of installments deposited by him. Therefore as per terms and conditions of the policy an amount of Rs.4529/- has been refunded to the complainant vide a Cheque dated 08.02.2012 and the same has been accepted by her.
6. We are of the considered opinion that the complainant has failed to prove any deficiency on the part of OPs in rendering service to her. In the present case the OP No.1 had informed the complainant regarding closing her policy vide letter dated 13.02.2012 and surrender value of the policy was refunded to her vide cheque dated 08.02.2012. Therefore the cause of action accrued in favour of the complainant on 13.02.2012. However the present complaint has been filed by her on 25.08.2015 i.e. after lapse of two years of limitation. Therefore we are of the considered opinion that the present complaint is barred by limitation. Reliance is placed on case law cited as 2014(4) CLT 254 (N.C.). Secondly the complainant has not produced any cogent and convincing evidence that the third annual installment of premium was deposited by her with the OP No.1. Moreover it is a settled law that in case the premium handed over by the insured to the agent of insurance company and the same is not deposited by the agent with the insurance company in that eventuality the insurance company cannot be held liable for the same. So the contention of the complainant that the installment of 3rd premium was handed over to the agent of OP No.1 is not tenable. In the present case since it is proved that the 3rd installment of premium was not deposited by the complainant as such as per terms and conditions of the policy she is not entitled for receiving refund of the total amount deposited by her. Surrender value amounting to Rs.4529/- has already been paid to her by the OP No.1.
7. In view of the aforesaid discussion the present complaint is without any merit and the same is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. Copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost as per rules. File be consigned after due compliance.
Announced in open Forum.
Dated: 24.10.2017.
(Raghbir Singh)
President
(Ansuya Bishnoi) (R.S.Panghal) District Consumer Disputes
Member Member Redressal Forum,Fatehabad
