BEFORE THE ADDITIONAL BENCH DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT MYSURU.

Consumer Complaint (C.C.)No. 1200/2016

Complaint filed on 26.04.2016

Date of Judgement.01.06.2017

PRESENT                                : 1. Shri Ramachandra  M.S.,  B.A., LL.B.,

                                                          PRESIDENT

                                        2. Shri  Thammanna,Y.S., B.Sc., LL.B., 

                                             MEMBER

Complainant/s               :                1. Dharmendra .S.N.

S/o S.N. Nabhirajaiah. S.N.

                                                          No.147 EWS, 1^st stage,

                                                         2^nd main, Kuvempunagar,

                                                          Mysuru-570023.

(Inperson)

V/s

Opposite/s                      :                     Bajaj Allianz life insurance

Company,

Sahukar Chennaiah Road

Saraswathipuram, Mysuru

Represented by Area Manager,

Mysuru Branch.

                                                (Sri. G.B. Arunkumar., Advocate)

 SHRI RAMACHANDRA . M.S.,

 PRESIDENT

JUDGEMENT

The complainant filed by the complaint Under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the opposite party.

2. The brief facts of the complaint is that the he is a policy holder of opponent party i.e., Bajaj Allianz life insurance company ltd bearing policy no 0080238598 of Bajaj Allianz Equity Index Fund II LF03024/07/06EQTYINDX0 issued on 02.01.2008, and paid three regular annual premium amount of Rs. 15,000/- thereafter complainant stopped to pay the further premiums as the market value of the policy had fallen in the share market since the opponent party had lost its credibility  in the public sector. Complainant was intending to surrender the policy after hike of the unit value of the policy in the share market. But it is known to complainant and shocked when he visited the opponent party office on 16.03.2015 that the policy had already been terminated on 07.01.2014 without prior notice to the complainant and the opponent office staff informed that the foreclosure amount had already been paid to the complainant. Complainant requested them to repay the remaining amount as complainant had not received any amount but they have not interested to solve the problem due to their personal interest. Complainant was wandering so many times. Since 16.06.2015 to the opponent party office by setting aside his important office and personal works as the complainant is a responsible official in judiciary department but the problem was not solved. It is causing great financial loss and mental agony to the complainant. Hence complainant has decided to filed a litigation against the opponent party seeking for the relief of compensation and other relief as prayed in the complaint.

3. Notice to the opposite party duly served represented by counsel filed version, by contending that the entire allegation of complaint is denied as false and the complainant is put strict proof of the same.

4. Further opposite party contended at the outset the present complaint is misconceived , misconstrued , contrary , to the contract between the parties and therefore untenable in law  and deserve to be dismissed. The opposite party submits that this Hon’ble forum as no jurisdiction  to try the said the complaint in the light of ruling rendered  by National Commission in a case between Ramalal Agarwal Vs Bajaj Allianz life Insurance company limited reported in 2013/2 CPR 389 on account of all these the opposite party as prayed for the dismissal of complaint.

5. Heard arguments

6. The complainant in spite of sufficient opportunity provided failed to file chief examination affidavit and it is taken as not filed. The opposite party filed chief examination affidavit, and documents in support of his contention. Heard arguments reserve for orders.

7. The points that arise for our consideration are;

1. Whether the complainant proves that there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party by not refunding insurance premium amount paid by complainant and thereby he is entitle for the reliefs sought?

2. What order?

8. Our answer to the above points is as follows;

1. Point No.1: In the Negative
2. Point No.2: As per final order for the following;

REASONS

9. Point No.1:- That the complainant after filing the complaint he remained absent on all the hearing dates , in spite of sufficient opportunity he failed to lead evidence by way of affidavit, and evidence of complainant is taken as not filed. On the other hand the opposite party has filed chief examination affidavit and documents in support of his defence. From the above facts it is clear that the complainant has miserably failed to put forth his claim in the complainant on account of these, the complaint filed by complainant is liable to be dismissed.

10. According this forum we answered Point no.1 in the negative and pass the following:

11. Point no.2:- From the above discussion we here by proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

1. The complaint is hereby  dismissed.
2. Give the copies of this order to the parties, as per Rules

(Dictated to the stenographer transcribed , typed by her, transcript corrected by us and then pronounced in open court on the 01^st June 2017)  

Shri Thammanna Y.S.,                                  Shri Ramachandra M.S.,   

          Member.                                                             President.