Present (1) Nisha Nath Ojha,
District & Sessions Judge (Retd.) President
(2) Smt. Karishma Mandal,
Member
Date of Order : 31.03.2017
Nisha Nath Ojha
- In the instant case the Complainant has sought for following reliefs against the Opposite party:-
- To direct the opposite party to hand over the certificate of the deposit made by the complainant of Rs. 10,000/- ( Rs. Ten Thousand only ) with opposite party under Bajaj Allianz New Unit Gain.
- To direct the opposite parties to pay Rs. 10,000/- ( Rs. Ten Thousand only ) as compensation.
- To direct the opposite parties to pay Rs. 10,000/- ( Rs. Ten Thousand only ) as litigation costs.
- The facts of this case lies in a narrow compass which is as follows:-
The complainant has asserted that the complainant had deposited Rs. 10,000/- with opposite party under the scheme named as Bajaj Allianz New Unit gain Single premium scheme vide cheque no. 079126 dated 31.12.2008 of ICICI Bank, Patna was encahsed by opposite party but despite several repeated request the opposite parties have not sent policy documents of investment to the complainant.
The complainant has further asserted that for sending the certificate of deposit the complainant had given notice to the opposite parties vide annexure – 1 but despite the aforesaid fact the grievance of the complainant has not been redressed.
On behalf of opposite parties a written statement has been filed in Para – 7 of which the following facts have been asserted, “that the statement made in the complaint petition are false and concocted. The opposite parties had already issued the policy documents to the complainant well within a reasonable period. However, another copy of the bond and whole policy documents have been handed over to the lawyer of the complainant during pendency of the instant case and as such the grievance of the complainant have already redressed by the opposite parties. Some delay has been committed inadvertently in supply of the duplicate policy documents only because it had been brought from the head office of the opposite parties.”
-
The complainant has came for a simple prayer praying the opposite parties to give certificate of investment to the complainant. In Para – 7 of the written statement the company has stated that the opposite party has issued policy documents to the complainant and a second copy of the Bond has been handed over to the lawyer of the complainant during pendency of the complaint.
There is no rejoinder on behalf of complainant. However an affidavit have been filed on behalf of opposite parties with photocopy of the proposal form for life insurance in which bears two numbers 828890594 this number has been earlier has been written after cutting number 0082880594.
From the order sheet dated 23.03.2015 it transpires that the question of two numbers on proposal form which has been referred above was raised by learned counsel for the complainant with apprehension that the proposal form might have been changed and the opposite parties were directed to clarify as to under what circumstances on page – 3 of proposal form after cutting 0082880594 the other number i.e. 828890594 has been written but despite allowing several adjournments no action has been taken by opposite parties in this regard.
The aforesaid fact clearly shows deficiency on the part of opposite parties.
Hence the opposite parties are directed to serve the duplicate/authenticated copy of the policy documents to the complainant within the period of two months from the date of receipt of this order or certified copy of this order.
Accordingly this complaint stands disposed off with aforementioned direction.
Member President
