Haryana

Sonipat

CC/174/2015

Mohit Bharnagar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Bharti Axa Life Insurance Co. LTd. - Opp.Party(s)

Kuldeep Singh Antil

25 May 2016

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

SONEPAT.

               

                                  Complaint No.174 of 2015

                                Instituted on:25.05.2015

                                Date of order:25.05.2016

 

Mohit Bhatnagar resident of H.No.47, Kabirpur road, Opp. Arvind Gas Agency, Vikaspuri, Sonepat.

                                                     ……Complainant

 

                     VERSUS

 

Bharti AXA Life Ins. Co. L-Bharti AXA Life Ins., SCO 82-83, Mughal Kanal, Karnal, Haryana through its Authorities Signatory.

 

     ……Respondent.

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF       

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

Argued by: Shri Rajender Singh Malik   Adv. for complainant.

           Shri Karandeep Cheema, Adv. for respondent.

 

 

BEFORE     NAGENDER SINGH, PRESIDENT.

          PRABHA WATI, MEMBER.

         

 

O R D E R

 

          Complainant has filed the present complaint against the respondent alleging therein that he has purchased two policies from respondent i.e. one bearing no.5011183976 and paid premium of Rs.26000/- and second bearing no.5011346805 and paid premium of Rs.28500/-. The complainant has returned both the policy bonds to the respondent as neither of two fulfilled the financial goals of the complainant within stipulated period of 15 days free look period.    However,  Ankur visited the office of the complainant on 30.10.2013 and took a fresh cheque no.793928 dated 7.11.2013 for Rs.1,02,000/- alongwith the relevant documents and he also assured that the complainant will  refund his money of Rs.26000/- and Rs.28500/- to the complainant.  The complainant has made complaint in this regard to the respondent and also to the said Ankur, but of no use.  However, it came to the notice of the complainant that Ankur has left the respondent  and due to this wrongful act of the respondent, the complainant has suffered unnecessary mental agony and harassment.  So, he has come to this Forum and has filed the present complaint.

2.        In reply, the respondent has submitted that the complainant himself had opted for yearly/annual premium which clearly indicated in the proposal form.  The complainant has not approached the respondent during the free look period or even after that and meaning thereby, he was agreed to the policy and with its terms and conditions.  The complainant has paid only one premium and thereafter he did not pay any other renewal premiums in the subject policies. The complainant has paid Rs.26000/- and Rs.28500/- for policy no.501-1183976 and 501-1346805.  The respondent never received any cheque no.793928 dated 7.11.2013 for Rs.102000/- under proposal form no.7640703 dated 30.10.2014.  The complainant has not suffered any mental agony or harassment at the hands of the respondent and thus, he is not entitled for any relief and compensation and thus, prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

3.        We have heard the complainant in person and learned counsel for the respondent at length and have also gone through the entire case file very carefully.

4.        Ld. Counsel for the complainant has submitted that the complainant has purchased two policies from respondent i.e. one bearing no.5011183976 and paid premium of Rs.26000/- and second bearing no.5011346805 and paid premium of Rs.28500/-. The complainant has returned both the policy bonds to the respondent as neither of two fulfilled the financial goals of the complainant within stipulated period of 15 days free look period.    However,  Ankur visited the office of the complainant on 30.10.2013 and took a fresh cheque no.793928 dated 7.11.2013 for Rs.1,02,000/- alongwith the relevant documents and he also assured that the complainant will  refund his money of Rs.26000/- and Rs.28500/- to the complainant.  The complainant has made complaint in this regard to the respondent and also to the said Ankur, but of no use.  However, it came to the notice of the complainant that Ankur has left the respondent  and due to this wrongful act of the respondent, the complainant has suffered unnecessary mental agony and harassment.

          On the other hand, ld. Counsel for the respondent has submitted that the complainant himself had opted for yearly/annual premium which clearly indicated in the proposal form.  The complainant has not approached the respondent during the free look period or even after that and meaning thereby, he was agreed to the policy and with its terms and conditions.  The complainant has paid only one premium and thereafter he did not pay any other renewal premiums in the subject policies. The complainant has paid Rs.26000/- and Rs.28500/- for policy no.501-1183976 and 501-1346805.  The respondent never received any cheque no.793928 dated 7.11.2013 for Rs.102000/- under proposal form no.7640703 dated 30.10.2014.  The complainant has not suffered any mental agony or harassment at the hands of the respondent and thus, he is not entitled for any relief and compensation and thus, prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

          In the present case, as per document Annexure C10 and C11, first policy was received by the complainant on 26.8.2013 and the second policy was received on 10.10.2013.

          We have perused the contents of para no.4 of the reply, wherein it is submitted by the respondent that the complainant had called at the call centre on 8th and 20th November, 2013 asking details regarding the status of cancellation of policies within free look period.

 

          The perusal of the record shows that the complainant has sent both the policies through courier in the respondents’ office  vide courier receipt Ex.C3 dated 2.9.2013, Ex.C4 dated 16.10.2013, Ex.C5 dated 16.10.2013 and Ex.C6 dated 11.11.2013. From these courier receipts, it is crystal clear that the complainant has dispatched the insurance policies in original alongwith other relevant documents for cancellation of the policies.  Further as per Ex.C8 i.e. reminder dated 11.11.2013, the complainant has requested the respondents for the refund of his amount.  So, in our view, whatever the action has been taken by the complainant, the same is within free look period.

 

          Further more, the complainant has led cogent evidence which may go to prove the deficiency in service on the part of the respondent and thus, the complainant is legally entitled to get the amount of Rs.26000/- and Rs.28500/- in respect of policies no.5011183976 and 5011346805.  Accordingly, we hereby direct the respondent to refund the above said amount to the complainant within a period of 60 days from the  date of passing of this order, failing which, the above said amount shall fetch interest at the rate of 09% per annum from the date of passing of this order till its realization.  Since the complainant has been able to prove the deficiency in service on the part of the respondent, the respondent is further directed to compensate the complainant to the tune of Rs.two thousand for rendering deficient services, harassment, mental agony and under the head of litigation expenses.

 

          With these observations, findings and directions, the present complaint stands allowed.

          Certified copy of this order be provided to both the parties free of cost.

 

File be consigned to the record-room.

 

 

(Prabha Wati)                       (Nagender Singh-President)

Member DCDRF                            DCDRF, Sonepat.

 

Announced: 25.05.2016