IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS’ DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT MYSORE<br /> <br /> PRESENT: 1. Shri.A.T.Munnoli<br /> B.A., L.L.B (Spl.) - President <br /> <br /> <br /> 2. Shri. Shivakumar.J.<br /> B.A., L.L.B., - Member<br /> <br /> CC 394/09 DATED 01.12.2009<br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> Complainant Poornima, W/o M.Shivalinge Gowda, No.365/5, Opposite Ganapathi Sachidananda High Schook Jatti Beedi, Nazarbad, Mysore.<br /> <br /> (By Sri. M.Shivalingegowda, Advocate)<br /> <br /> Vs. <br /> Opposite Party The Manager,<br /> Bazaj Allianze Life Insurance Company Ltd., Mythri Arcade, 1st Floor, Kantharaj Urs Road, Saraswathipuram, Mysore.<br /> <br /> (By Sri. Ashwini Kumar Joshi, Advocate)<br /> <br /> Nature of complaint : Deficiency in service<br /> Date of filing of complaint : 27.10.2009<br /> Date of appearance of O.P. : 11.11.2009<br /> Date of order : 01.12.2009<br /> Duration of Proceeding : 21 DAYS<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> PRESIDENT <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> MEMBER<br /> <br /> <br /> Sri. A.T.Munnoli,<br /> President<br /> <br /> 1. Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, the complainant has filed the complaint, seeking direction to the opposite party to issue insurance policy.<br /> <br /> 2. Amongst other facts in the complaint, it is stated that, on 06.10.2008 towards insurance premium, complainant paid a sum of Rs.347/- to opposite party. In spite of receipt of the premium amount, the opposite party has not issued the policy. Complainant issued notice to the opposite party, calling upon to issue the policy bond. But, there is no compliance. Hence, it is prayed to allow the complaint.<br /> <br /> 3. Though, opposite party appeared before the Forum through advocate, no version is filed. <br /> <br /> 4. To prove the facts alleged in the complaint, the complainant has filed her affidavit and produced certain documents. We have heard the arguments of the learned advocate for the complainant and perused the records.<br /> <br /> 5. Now, we have to consider, whether the complainant has proved any deficiency in the service on the part of the opposite party and that she is entitled to the reliefs sought?<br /> <br /> For the following reasons, our finding is in affirmative. <br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> <br /> 6. Point no. 1:- As alleged in the complaint, to prove the fact of payment of premium, the complainant has sworn to affidavit and also produced premium payment of receipt. Prior to filing of the complaint, notice was sent to opposite party, which has been duly acknowledged. In spite of it, the opposite party nether replied, nor furnished the policy.<br /> <br /> 7. However, it is relevant to note that, there is no sufficient evidence on record that, the offer made by the complainant was accepted by the opposite party. Hence, under the circumstances, if at all, the opposite party has not accepted the offer, it is bound to refund the premium amount with interest. However, from the records, complainant has made out deficiency in service on the aprt of the opposite party. Accordingly, we pass the following order:- <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> 1. The Complaint is allowed.<br /> 2. The opposite party is hereby directed to issue insurance policy to the complainant, within a month from the order. <br /> 3. If the opposite party is not willing to issue policy, it shall refund the premium amount of Rs.347/- along with interest at the rate of 12% p.a. and further shall pay compensation of Rs.2,000/- to the complainant, within two months from the date of this order.<br /> 4. The opposite party also pay a sum of Rs.1,000/- towards the cost of the proceedings to the complainant.<br /> 5. Give a copy of this order to each party according to Rules.<br /> (Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by her, transcript revised by us and then pronounced in the open Forum on this the day 1st December 2009)<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> (A.T.Munnoli) <br /> President <br /> <br /> <br /> (Shivakumar.J.)<br /> Member<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />