BEFORE THE III ADDITIONAL BANGALORE URBAN

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

                               BENGALURU – 560 027.                              

DATED THIS THE 23^nd DAY OF JULY, 2021

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.146/2020

PRESENT:                                                          

Sri.C.V.Maragoor, B.com, LL.M.               ….      PRESIDENT

Smt.L.Mamatha, B.A., (Law), LL.B.….    MEMBER

Sri. M.B. Seena, B.A., (Law), LL.B.            ….         MEMBER

Mr.Ajith B S/o Late Mr.Bhaskar J,

Aged about 36 Years,

Residing at No.508, 1^st Floor,

Srinivasanagar, Bank Colony,

V/s

OPPOSITE PARTIES:

1. Bharti Axa Life Insurance Company Limited,
3.  

Malad Link Road,

Malad West,

Rep by its Managing Director & CEO.

2. Bharti Axa Life Insurance Company Limited,

Having its branch office at No.15,

Upper Ground Floor,

Corporate Court, Infantry Road,

Rep by its Branch Manager.

Ex-parte.

******

//ORDER//

SRI.C.V.MARGOOR, PRESIDENT

This complaint is filed under Section-12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 to direct the Opposite Parties Bharti Axa Life Insurance Company Limited to return the complainant’s policy amount of Rs.1,53,868/- with interest from the date of payment and Rs.15,000/- as cost of the complaint.   Further complainant prayed to award Rs.13,75,000/- as compensatory damages towards mental harassment and unnecessary hardships suffered by the complainant, to award punitive damages to deter the opposite party from continuing such unethical and deceptive trade practices and also direct the City Crime Branch of Police to lodge a complaint for cheating against the opposite party to investigate its fraudulent trade practice.

2. It is the case of complainant that he had availed first policy i.e., monthly income plan + with yearly installment of Rs.50,000/- from opposite party on 28.03.2014 bearing policy No.501-1954335.  After receiving policy document the complainant found mismatch in the policy offered by their employee/agent and lateron he came to know that the opposite party employee/agent had cheated him by confronting an inflated illustration to lure him to subscribe to the said policy.  Further the opposite party employee/agent had forged his signatures to prepare the supporting documents.  The employee/agent had orally agreed to return the premium amount whenever he surrenders the policy.

3. The complainant had availed 2^nd policy on 29.10.2018 by paying premium amount of Rs.50,000/- + tax bearing policy No.501-8102128.  The agent of opposite party has induced him to obtain                       2^nd policy and promised to return the 1^st policy premium amount in 10 installments of Rs.5,000/- each.  Further they have assured the complainant to pay commission if he recommends his colleagues to invest in Bharti Axa.  The complainant had referred Mr.Sumanth as a lead and he has availed a policy with opposite party.  After receiving policy document on 14.12.2018 the complainant came to know that Bharati Axa Life Dhanvarsh Plan was insured which is totally different from what was discussed and mailed to the complainant.  The complainant has made correspondence with opposite party for change of Dhanvarsh Plan into Super Endowment Guaranteed Plan.  During the correspondence, the opposite party without his instruction has got deduction of 2^nd year premium amount.  The complainant has approached Insurance Ombudsman but not satisfied with the award passed by Insurance Ombudsman dt.13.01.2020.  Hence, the complainant has approached this Commission with the above prayers. 

4. In response to the notice, the opposite party No.1 & 2 remained           ex-parte.

       5. The complainant filed his affidavit evidence and got marked EXs.P1 to 17 documents.  We have heard the oral arguments of complainant in addition to written brief and the points that would arise for our determination are as under;

1. Whether the complainant proves the deficiency of service and unfair trade practice of opposite party in obtaining policies ?
2. Is complainant entitled to the reliefs sought in the complaint?

6. Our findings on the above points are as under:-

1. POINT NO.1  : In the affirmative
2. POINT NO.2  : In the partly affirmative for

                       the following;

REASONS

7. Point No.1 & 2: The complainant has submitted that the opposite party has cheated him through its employee/agent while obtaining policies twice.  The complainant further submitted that the opposite party employee/agent had forged his signatures to prepare the supporting documents.   

8. The complainant in the affidavit evidence and written brief reiterated the averments of complaint.  The complainant has repeatedly stated in the complaint, evidence and written brief that the opposite party has not only cheated him but also forged his signatures to prepare the supporting documents to issue policies.  The proceedings before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission are summary in nature and the commission has no power to investigate as to whether the opposite party has cheated and forged the signatures of the complainant to prepare the supporting documents.  The complainant has asked for return of 1^st policy premium amount of Rs.50,000/-.  EX.P1 policy bearing No.501-1954335 had obtained by the complainant on 31.03.2014 and he discontinued the payment of premium of the next due date premium i.e., 28.03.2015.  This complaint is filed on 12.02.2020 nearly 5 years from the date of discontinuation of policy.  EX.P1 policy clause No.12 deals with “Free look period” “If policyholder disagrees with any of the terms and conditions of the Policy, policyholder has the option to return the original policy along with a letter stating reasons for the objection within 15 days of receipt of the policy.  The policy will accordingly be cancelled and the policyholder will be refunded an amount equal to the premium paid subject to a deduction of a proportionate risk premium for the period on cover, the expenses incurred by the insurer on medical examination(if any) and stamp duty charges”.  The complainant has not opted to cancel the policy within 15 days of receipt of the policy document as per free look period clause.  The complainant would have returned the original policy EX.P1 for cancellation and instead of that he sent mail that his signatures have been forged in supporting the documents.  The Complainant would have approached this commission within 2 years from the date of receipt of EX.P1 policy in the year 2014 as per S-24(A) Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  Therefore, the claim in respect of                1^st policy dt.31.03.2014 is barred by limitation. 

9. The complainant had availed 2^nd policy i.e., EX.P8 Bharti Axa Life Dhan Varsha bearing No.501-8102128 on 29.10.2018.  The complainant in the complaint para No.14 stated that he had received EX.P8 policy document on 14.12.2019.  EX.P8 also contains “free look period” which having option to cancellation of the policy if he disagreed with any of the terms and conditions within 15 days of receipt of the policy.  The complainant has not opted for cancellation of policy and on the contrary he made correspondence.  EX.P9 mail to the agent of opposite party wherein the Complainant stated that he had not opted for Dhan Varsha scheme and they have issued wrong policy.  The complainant asked for change of Dhanvarsh policy to Super Endowment Guaranteed Plan.  The complainant has sent EX.P10 Gmail dt.16.03.2019 to the opposite party narrating the issue of EX.P8 contrary to inflated illustration given by the agent.  Under EX.P10 Gmail, the complainant asked the opposite party to issue the correct policy document of Super Endowment Guaranteed Plan with correct illustration within this week.  The complainant relied upon Gmail dt.23.10.2018 and 27.10.2018 produced along with EX.P6 Gmail dt.23.10.2018 sent by K.T.Mahalakshmi to Gowda Ashwini Suresh employee/agent of opposite party in connection with complainant’s mail.  Under this mail it is stated that as on the update on July 01, 2018 the current FD, RD Banking interest rates has fall down for 6.25%.  And the ULIP Plans, Market Related plans, Bonus plans, and mutual funds we cannot assure any constant rate of returns or guaranteed returns on such.  Bharti Axa is facilitating you to earn guaranteed returns through Super Endowment Guaranteed Plan which will assure you a guaranteed benefits of 12% on sum assured, so you will be getting double returns without any fluctuation.  In the same email Dhan Varsh Benefits explanation is given along with table containing premium benefits payable and fixed return year wise.  Further the opposite party produced illustration benefits of Bharti Axa Life Dhana varsha illustration dt.27.10.2018 life to be assured Ajit Bhaskar - complainant.  On perusal of EX.P6 Gmail the agent has assured to pay back 10% in each installments of the 1^st surrender policy of the complainant and policy referral commission.  The opposite party has not complied with the assurance given by the employees i.e., agents of opposite party.  When the complainant asked for change of Dhana Varsha policy into Super Endowment Guaranteed policy under EX.P10 mail dt.16.03.2019 the opposite party without the complainant’s instruction has got deduction of 2^nd year premium a sum of Rs.51,368/- on 10.10.2019 from the Complainant’s account maintained in Karnataka Bank Limited.  The opposite party would not have collected 2^nd year premium when the correspondence was going with regard to change of policy or cancellation of 2^nd policy dt.29.10.2018.  The opposite parties have sold the policy to the complainant by giving misinformation with regard to terms and conditions.  The correspondence produced by the complainant proves that the opposite party has committed unfair trade practice while obtaining policies from the complainant.

10. The complainant is not entitled for refund of 1^st premium amount paid towards 1^st policy dt.31.03.2014 since the claim is barred by limitation.  Though the complainant has not opted for free look period for cancellation of 2^nd policy dt.29.10.2018, but email correspondence made by the complainant proves that the opposite party and their employee/agent have played unfair trade practice while obtaining policies from the complainant.  That apart, during the correspondence for change of policy the opposite party has deducted 2^nd year premium amount without consent of the complainant.  The complainant is entitled to get back 1^st and 2^nd year premium amount of Rs.1,03,868/- of the 2^nd policy with interest at the rate of 8% p.a. from 29.10.2018 till the date of payment.  The opposite party shall liable to pay bank rate of interest which was prevailed in the year 2018.

11. The complainant has asked for award of Rs.13,75,000/- as compensatory damages towards mental harassment and unnecessary hardship.  The said claim is not supported by any material evidence.  The complainant is not entitled for punitive damages as has not produced any document to show that he has sustained loss or suffered damages after obtaining 2^nd policy dt.29.10.2018.  The complainant has mentally suffered due to unfair trade practice committed by the opposite party while obtaining the policy.  The complainant is entitled for compensation towards mental suffering and approaching this commission and Insurance Ombudsman.  On this head the opposite party shall pay Rs.50,000/- compensation towards physical and mental suffering of the complainant.  In addition to that the opposite party shall pay litigation cost of Rs.15,000/- to the complainant.  For the above reason, we proceed to pass the following;

ORDER

The complaint is partly allowed directing the opposite party No.1 & 2 to return back premium amount of Rs.1,03,868/- with interest at the rate of 8% p.a. from 29.10.2018 till the date of payment.

It is further ordered that the opposite party No.1 & 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay a sum of Rs.65,000/- to the complainant as compensation and litigation cost within 30 days from the date of order otherwise, it carries interest at the rate of 8% p.a. from the date of filing the complaint till the date of payment.

    Supply free copy of this order to the complainant.

  (Dictated to the Stenographer, typed by her, the transcript corrected, revised and then pronounced in the open Commission on 23^rd day of July, 2021)                                            

•  M.B. SEENA )         (L.MAMATHA)          (C.V.MARAGOOR)    
•  

//ANNEXURE//

Witness examined for the complainants side:

Sri.Ajith B, the complainant has filed his affidavit.

Documents marked for the complainant side:

1. Original policy No.501-1954335.
2. Complaint via email dt.20.05.2014.
3. Email communication between 21.05.2014 to 09.09.2014.
4. Email communication dt.31.07.2014 to Ombudsman Hyderabad.
5. Inflated and misleading illustration of Super Endowment Guaranteed Plan sent via email dt.23.10.2018.
6. Receipt of acknowledgement dt.24.10.2018.
7. Email communication between 27.10.2018 to 31.10.2018. 
8. Original policy No.501-8102128.
9. Copy of letter requested by Mr.Nagesh and actual illustration of Super Endowment Guaranteed Plan.
10. Email communication with complaints unit between 16.03.2019 to 10.07.2019.
11. Copy of notice dt.21.09.2019, original postal receipt and acknowledgement.
12. Bank statement extract from 26.07.2019 to 29.10.2019.
13. Copy of complaint dt.25.10.2019 to ombudsman with postal acknowledgment.
14. Letter dt.01.11.2019 sent by ombudsman. 
15. Award dt.13.01.2020 on policy No.501-8102128.
16. Copy of repudiation letter dt.23.01.2020 and postal acknowledgment.
17. Copy of WhatsApp chats.

Witness examined for the opposite party side:                  

-NIL-

Documents marked for the Opposite Parties side:

-NIL-

• M.B. SEENA)         (L.MAMATHA)          (C.V.MARAGOOR)    
•