DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, PATIALA. Complaint No. CC/010/126 of 23.2.2010 Decided on: 3.8.2010 Dharam Paul Verma son of Sh.B.R.Verma, resident of #2128,urban Estate,Phase-II,Patiala-147002. -----------Complainant Versus 1. Bharti AXA L.I.C. Limited,S.C.O.-11,Chotti Baradari, Patiala-147001. 2. Manish,Saleshman, Bharti A.X.A. L.I.C.ltd., Patiala, S.C.O.II, Chotti Baradari, Patiala. ----------Opposite parties. Complaint under Sections 11 to 14 of the Consumer Protection Act. QUORUM Sh.Inderjit Singh, President Sh.Amarjit Singh Dhindsa,Member Smt.Neelam Gupta, Member Present: For the complainant: Ms.Gagandeep Gossal, Advocate For opposite parties: Ex-parte. ORDER SH.INDERJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT Complainant Dharam Paul Verma has brought this consumer complaint under Sections 11 to 14 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986 as amended up to date ( hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the opposite parties fully detailed and described in the head note of the complaint. 2. As per averments made in the complaint the case of the complainant is like this:- That the complainant was given a basic plan namely Aspire Life with a policy No.500-3924007 on July 27,2009. That the complainant gained knowledge of this policy by the agent but was not given complete information regarding the policy salesman/agent. The copy of policy bond too was given after about one month to the complainant. That the complainant had been persuaded by the salesman/agent to get a policy to which the complainant got a policy of Rs.50000/-.Lateron after the complainant deposited the said amount of Rs.50000/- .He was told that he was given a policy of Rs.1,00,000/- .The complainant was misguided and misled into buying the policy and he never gave his consent to but the same. The complainant complained regarding this matter to the complaints units and complaint Redressal Office vide registration No.DOCAF/e/2010/00033, but no reply has been given by the opposite parties as per their own assurance of addressing Consumer Grievance as mentioned in the policy bond(Bharti AXA Life Aspire Life).That the complainant who is a retired Senior Citizen, supposed to be living a life of peace and tranquility has been forced to initiate litigation due to the careless and non responsive behaviour of the opposite parties and has suffered much mental agony, harassment and physical discomfort. That there is a gross negligence/deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties. Hence this complaint. 3. Notice of the complaint was given to the opposite parties wherein they were directed to put in appearance in the Forum on 30.3.2010 but they having failed to put in appearance were proceeded against exparte on 6.4.2010. 4. In order to prove his case the complainant has tendered in evidence his affidavit,Ex.C1, copy of Section 2(1)(d) of the Act,Ex.C2, copy of policy bond,Ex.C3, copy of deposit receipt of Rs.50000/-,Ex.C4, copy of policy of Rs. One lac,Ex.C5, copy of complaint,Ex.C6 and copies of news items,Exs.C7 to C19. 5. The complainant has filed the written arguments. We have gone through the same and have also heard the learned counsel for the complainant. 6. The case of complainant is that he was give a basic plan namely Aspire Life with a policy No.500-3924007 on 27.7.2009 by opposite party no.2 i.e. Salesman of opposite party no.1. It is also the case of the complainant that he gained knowledge of this policy by the agent but was not given complete information regarding the policy by salesman/agent. It is also the case of the complainant that he was persuaded by the salesman/agent to get a policy to which he got a policy of Rs.50000/-. Lateron after he deposited the said amount of Rs.50000/- vide,Ex.C4 he was told that he was given a policy of Rs.1,00,000/-,Ex.C5 .It is also the case of the complainant that he was misguided and misled into buying the policy and he never gave his consent to but the same and that there is a gross negligence/deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties. 7. The perusal of the policy,Ex.C5 would show that the sum assured was Rs.10,00,000/- with annual premium Rs.one lac and semi annual premium Rs.50000/-.The claim of the complainant is that he was to purchase a policy for a sum insured of Rs.50000/-only but he was misguided and mislead to buy the policy in dispute which is of Rs.10lac.It is a deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties if the complainant has been given the policy of Rs.10,00,000/-in stead of Rs.50000/-. 8. In the result we allow the complaint partly and direct the opposite parties to refund the amount of Rs.50000/-paid as premium vide receipt,Ex.C4 along with interest @7% per annum from the date of payment till realization with another sum of Rs.5000/-as compensation inclusive of costs for harassment, inconvenience and mental torture within a period of one month from the receipt of the copy of the order. The copy of this order be sent to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record. Pronounced. Dated:3.8.2010. President Member Member
| | Mr. Amarjit Singh Dhindsa, Member | HONABLE MR. Inderjit Singh, PRESIDENT | Smt. Neelam Gupta, Member | | 
