2. Details of Web Aggregator:_ Policy Bazaar Insurance Web Aggregator Private Limited, address Plot NO. 119, Sector-44, Gurgaon, Haryana – 122001, Email ID:Bhasker@policybazaar.com.
Registration No. 06, Registration Code No. IRDAI/WBA21/15 valid till 13.07.2021.
…Opposite parties……
Complaint under section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Now amended Section 34 of Consumer protection Act 2019.
BEFORE: Amit Arora……………..President
Mukesh Sharma…………Member.
Indira Bhadana………….Member.
PRESENT: Complainant in person.
Sh. Sagar Bhatia, counsel for opposite party No.1.
Sh. Saurabh Gupta, counsel for opposite party No.2.
ORDER:
The facts in brief of the complaint are that the complainant purchased a Bajaj Smart Protect Goal Life Cover plus joint Life cover Term insurance of Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance co. Ltd., for him and his wife (Ruchita Jain) through his registered Web Aggregator Policy Bazaar Insurance Web Aggregator Private Limited The details of the booking details were as under:
He had applied for it on 31st May 2020 (Application No. 6105997084 & Booking ID 306059474).
a. Proof for application No. & booking ID, Proposal form.
b. He had made first payment of INR 2605/- on 31st May 2920 ref. No. 15301111906 (claim by Policy Bazaar (Merchant claim) on 01st June 2020)
c. Quotation.
d. He had share document & details on Ist June 2020.
e. His material was done on 9th June, 2020 and his wife medical was done on 12th June, 2020. All the due formalities like medical, documents etc. had been completed form his side till 12th June 2020 so he was hoping tha this poicy would getissued soon. When he checked after some time he found out his policy had not been issued moreover due to premium changes oin 15th June 2020, he would had to pay extra premium which was costing him INR 921/- per month (approx. INR 2 lakhs overall in lifetime value) more. He had checked his application status on Bajaj Allianz portal & found out that they had put wrong date of booking on the portal. They had put login date on the portal was 16th June 2020 instead of 31st May 2020. As per IRDA & life insurance guideline that Lie Insurance premium was fixed on the booking time, this can’t be changed after the booking due to in future premium change by the insurance company.He asked from his Manager Mr.,. Harsh Suri (Designation – Manager – Ops(Term) and they had confirme don phone the additional charges would reverse soon and issue the policy on old price of INR 2605/- ASAP. Because this was technical issue with in Policy Bazaar Vs. Bajaj Allianz Meanwhile he had sent email on 17th June 2020 to th June 2020, then he had received reply “His policy was under process once it got issue they would update him, 22nd June 2020, 24th June, 2020, 25th June 2020, 29th June, 2020, 01 July 2020 & 02nd of July 2020. After the 16 days follow up they had received same reply from BajajAllianz “His policy was under process once it got issue they will update him., again they had sent regular email till 06th July 2020 for policy update to Policy Bazaar & Bajaj Allianz. Finally, they had received a call & email from Policy Bazaar for additional balance of payment INR 921/- & Executive told him on the call “till he had not paid this amount of INR 921/- he was not covered in term plan” he was shocked that what they told him after 37 days from booking of Term Plan. The aforesaid act of opposite parties amounts to deficiency of service and hence the complaint. The complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite parties to:
a) issue the Bajaj Smart Protect Goal Life Cover Plus joint life cover term insurance on old premium of INR 2,605/-.
b) Refund of his additional premium of INR 921/-.
c) pay INR 2,25,000/- towards like printing & stationery, opinion & spending time.
d) pay INR 90,00,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .
2. Opposite party No.1 put in appearance through counsel and filed written statement wherein Opposite party No.1 refuted claim of the complainant and submitted that the complaint was not maintainable since the complainant did not contain any averment regarding the deficiency of service on the part of answering opposite. The complaint was not maintainable as there was no consumer dispute between the parties to the complaint. The answering opposite party submitted that the answering opposite party received proposal form having application NO. 6105997084 through opposite party No.1 for issuance of Bajaj Allianz Life Smart Protect Goal Insurance policy. Alongwith proposal form, the answering opposite party received an amount of Rs.2605/- towards the premium amount. Upon receipt of the documents, the answering opposite party generated receipt reference ID:SPG2250122 dated 16.06.2020. it was submitted that the underwriting department of the answering opposite party processed the proposal form and observed that the monthly premium amount, inclusive of GST, of the Opted Insurance Plan was Rs.3,526/- whereas the answering opposite party had received on Rs.2605/-. Therefore, the proposal form could not be processed further and the answering opposite party raised demand for balance of premium of Rs.921/-. The answering opposite party received the balance premium of Rs.921/- on 08.07.2021 and thereafter, the proposal form was processed again and the answering opposite party issued policy NO. 0401708911 covering risk from 17 June 2020 for Term of 45 years on payment of monthly premium of Rs.2,988/- + GST & other statutory taxes for period of 15 years. Itr was submitted that the complainants with their free consent and will, without any pressure or force from the answering opposite party, paid the balance of premium of Rs.921/- on 08.07.2020 for issuance of Life Insurance Policy. It was worthwhile to mention that since the policy was not issued till 08.07.2020 on part payment of premium of Rs.2605/- and the complainants were unhappy about the demand of balance premium, the complainant would not have paid the balance premium and request for cancellation of proposal form and refund of premium. The answering opposite party did not force the complainant to pay the balance premium and purchase the policy. Even if the complainants would not have paid the balance premium, the answering opposite party would have returned the part premium already paid, as per procedure. Opposite party No. 1 denied rest of the allegations leveled in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3. Opposite party No.2 put in appearance through counsel and filed written statement wherein Opposite party No.2 refuted claim of the complainant and admitted that the complainant purchased the insurance policy from opposite party No.1 and paid the premium amount of the policy to it. The terms and conditions of the policy were agreed upon between the complainant and the opposite party No.1. It was further submitted that the complainant was not the consumer of opposite party No.2 in terms of the Consumer Protection act. It was submitted that the dispute in the present complaint case relates to the issuance of the insurance policy. The insurance policy in question was issued by the opposite party No.1 on the terms and conditions agreed between the complainant and opposite party NBo.1. Opposite party No.2 was merely an intermediary between the complainant and opposite party No.1. Opposite party No. 2 denied rest of the allegations leveled in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
4. The parties led evidence in support of their respective versions.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file.
6. In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against opposite parties– Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Co. Ltd. with the prayer to: a) issue the Bajaj Smart Protect Goal Life Cover Plus joint life cover term insurance on old premium of INR 2,605/-. b) Refund of his additional premium of INR 921/-. c) pay INR 2,25,000/- towards like printing & stationery, opinion & spending time. d) pay INR 90,00,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .
To establish his case the complainant has led in his evidence, Ex.CW1/A – affidavit of Shri Kailash Chand Jain, Ex.CW-1 – Payment coupon, Ex.CW-2(colly) – Track your appointment.
On the other hand counsel for the opposite party No.1 strongly
agitated and opposed. As per the evidence of the opposite party No.1 affidavit of Ms. Swati Seth, Zonal legal Head – North 1, Legal & Compliance, Bajaj Allianz Insurance co. ltd. Having office at 3rd floor, SCO-14, Urban Estate, Sector -14, Urban Estate, Gurugram, Ex.R1/A - proposal form,, Ex.R1/B - transaction slip.
As per evidence of opposite party No.2, Ex.OP2/A – affidavit of Rohit Kumar, S/o Shri Akhil Kumar, having office address at plot NO. 119, Sector-44, Gurgaon-122001.
7. It is evident from proposal form & receipt vide Ex.R/A & R1/B the opposite party No.1 received proposal form having application NO. 6105997084 through opposite party No.1 for issuance of Bajaj Allianz Life Smart Protect Goal Insurance policy. Alongwith proposal form, the opposite party No.1received an amount of Rs.2605/- towards the premium amount. Upon receipt of the documents, the answering opposite party generated receipt reference ID:SPG2250122 dated 16.06.2020. Opposite party No.1 processed the proposal form and observed that the monthly premium amount, inclusive of GST, of the Opted Insurance Plan was Rs.3,526/- whereas the opposite party No. 1 had received Rs.2605/-. Therefore, the proposal form could not be processed further and the opposite party No.1 raised demand for balance of premium of Rs.921/-. Opposite party No.1 received the balance premium of Rs.921/- on 08.07.2021 and thereafter, the proposal form was processed again and the opposite party No.1 issued policy NO. 0401708911 covering risk from 17 June 2020 for Term of 45 years on payment of monthly premium of Rs.2,988/- + GST & other statutory taxes for period of 15 years.
8. After going through the evidence led by the parties, the Commission is of the opinion that no deficiency in service on the party of the opposite parties have been proved. Resultantly, the complaint is dismissed. Copy of this order be given to the parties concerned free of costs and file be consigned to record room.
Announced on: 19.12.2022 (Amit Arora)
President
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Mukesh Sharma)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Indira Bhadana)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
