BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 86 of 2015
Date of Institution : 29.04.2015
Date of Decision : 14.10.2016
Balraj Singh son of Shri Telu Ram, resident of House No.591, New Housing Board Colony, Barnala Road, Sirsa.
….Complainant.
Versus
1. Aviva Life Insurance Company India Ltd., Head Office, Aviva Tower, Sector Road, Opp. Golf Course, DLF Phase V, Sector- 43, Gurgaon-122003.
2. Aviva Life Insurance Company India Ltd., Registered Office, 2nd Floor, Parkashdeep Building 7 Tolstory Marg, New Delhi- 110001
3. The Branch Manager, Aviva Life Insurance Company India Ltd., Office at Hisar, District Hisar.
4. Lokesh Kaushik, Authorized Agent, Aviva Life Insurance Company India Ltd., at Sirsa, District Sirsa now resident of Ashok Vihar, Bunkar Colony, A-43, New Delhi.
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
Before: SHRI S.B.LOHIA ……………………..PRESIDENT.
SHRI RANBIR SINGH PANGHAL …MEMBER.
Present: Sh.N.K.Daroliya, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh.H.S. Raghav, Advocate for the opposite parties no.1 to 3.
Opposite party no.4 exparte.
ORDER
In brief, the case of the complainant is that agent of the opposite party no.1 visited his house and allured the complainant for the purchase of Insurance Plan namely “Aviva Dhan Varidhi (Money Back Policy)” explaining so many benefits alongwith looking period for three years and also stated that he can withdraw the whole amount after three years from the date of commencement of the policy. He also assured that as per policy, the complainant can return the policies within 15 days from the date of receipt of the policy documents at his residence and company will refund the whole amount deposited against the policy being a first premium. The complainant purchased two policies from the ops bearing policy No.10090111 & 10090137 and deposited the amount of Rs.99,594/- and Rs.41058/- respectively against the said two policies vide demand drafts dated 23.12.2013. But inspite of that the opposite parties have failed to deliver the original policy to the complainant till today despite his oral requests through telephone and written letters, e-mail etc. and at last the ops issued a letter on 28.8.2014 vide which they assured the complainant to send the duplicate policies document to the complainant and also asked to furnish some documents with them, hence the complainant submitted the documents as claimed by them. Then the ops sent the above said both policies to the complainant which had been received by him on 1.10.2014, but the complainant was not satisfied with the policies document, hence as per policy, he returned the policies on 9.10.2014 i.e. within 15 days from the date of receipt of the policy documents and ops assured him to return the deposited amount very shortly. Thereafter, the complainant approached so many times to the ops, but no satisfactory reply was given by them and lastly he received a letter dated 21.0.2014 from the ops vide which the ops had cancelled the policy no.10090137 under Free Look Period and agreed to refund the total amount paid against this policy after deduction of IRDA mandate free look charges, but failed to refund the amount paid by complainant in lieu of cancelled policy no.10090111 despite so many requests. Hence, the present complaint for a direction to the opposite parties to refund Rs.99,594/- deposited by the complainant alongwith interest and to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- as damages on account of harassment and to pay a sum of Rs.11,000/- as litigation expenses.
2. On notice, opposite parties No.1 to 3 replied that complainant himself proposed for Regular Premium Unit Linked Insurance plan namely “Aviva Dhan Vriddhi” of the ops after fully understanding the feature, benefits and terms and conditions of the plan vide a proposal in December, 2013 and opted out of his free will to pay yearly regular premiums. The proposal for insurance was accepted by the ops and policies bearing nos. 10090111 & 10090137 was issued with date of commencement as December, 2013 and yearly premiums amounting to Rs.98101/- and Rs.39827/- were stipulated to be paid by the complainant. The original policy bond containing terms and conditions of the insurance contract between the complainant and ops was duly received by complainant which was delivered through speed post as well as Blue dart courier. However, the complainant paid only one yearly initial premium amounting to Rs.98101/- and Rs.39827/- and failed to pay the regular premiums due in December, 2014 and onwards, hence, the policy in question lapsed in accordance with terms and conditions of the contract. Hence, the policy in question is lying lapsed and nothing is payable under the policy. He was given 15 days time to review the terms and conditions of the contract as per the Policy Holders’ Protections Regulation, 2002 but he never raised any objection with regard to the policy and did not give any written notice to ops and did not return the original policy bond for cancellation of the policy within 15 days of receipt of policy bond. Remaining contents of the complaint have been denied.
3. OP no.4 did not appear despite issuance of summons through registered cover and was proceeded against exparte.
4. The complainant has tendered his affidavit Ex.C1 and documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C13. On the other hand, the opposite parties have not produced any affidavit or document.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the case file carefully.
6. The complainant got two policies i.e. policy no.10090111 against the premium amount of Rs.99,594/- and policy no.10090137 against the premium of Rs.41058/- simultaneously from the opposite parties and deposited the above said premiums vide demand drafts dated 23.12.2013. The case of the complainant is that opposite parties have not delivered the original policies to him despite many letters and e-mails and thereafter he received a letter on 28.8.2014 from the ops with the assurance to send duplicate policies and upon receipt of the same on 1.10.2014, since he was not satisfied with the policies documents, he returned the policies on 9.10.2014 within 15 days from the date of receipt of the policy documents. But he has received the amount of one policy No.10090137 and has not received the amount of another policy no.10090111. The opposite parties have wrongly averred that original policy bonds were delivered to the complainant in time and therefore, objection of complainant after lapse of free look period is legally not maintainable. The complainant has placed on file letter of ops dated 21.10.2014 Ex.C5 wherein they claimed that policy no.10090137 was dispatched on 24.1.2014 and was received by complainant on 28.1.2014 policy no.10090111 was dispatched on 17.1.2014 which was received on 23.1.2014 but no such receipts of speed post and courier have been placed on file by the opposite parties. The policy documents dispatched by the ops on 27.9.2014 as mentioned in the above said letter were only received by the complainant on 1.10.2014 and on 9.10.2014 the complainant wrote a letter (copy Ex.C11) to the ops to cancel the policies i.e. well within free look period of 15 days as per terms and conditions of policies. As both the policies were received by the complainant on 1.10.2014 and he applied for cancellation of the same on 9.10.2014, the ops are not justified in cancelling one policy only and retaining the amount of another policy no.10090111 on the ground that company has decided to cancel the policy bearing no.10090137 under free look period. Hence, the opposite parties have wrongly retained the premium amount of policy no.10090111.
7. Thus, as a sequel to our above discussion, we allow the present complaint and direct the opposite parties to refund amount of Rs.99,594/- deposited by the complainant as premium against policy no.10090111 alongwith interest @9% per annum from the date of applying for cancellation of the policy i.e. 9.10.2014 till actual realization. The opposite parties are also directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation for harassment including litigation expenses. This order should be complied within a period of one month, failing which the complainant will be entitled to initiate proceedings under Sections 25/27 of the Act against the ops. Copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.
Announced in open Forum. President,
Dated:14.10.2016. Member. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Sirsa.
