Delhi

East Delhi

CC/180/2019

RAMAN LAL JAIN - Complainant(s)

Versus

BHARTI AXA. - Opp.Party(s)

03 Mar 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

 

 

C.C. NO.  180/2019

 

	Raman Lal Jain Flat No. B-B-2/201, Paradise Apartment, 40, I.P. Extension, Delhi 110092	….Complainant
Versus
	Bharti Axa Life Insurance Co. Ltd. Unit No. 1904, 19th Floor, Prainee Crescenzo, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex Opp. MCA Club, Bandra East Mumbai 400 051 (Maharashtra)	……OP

 

                                                         

 

Date of Institution: 27.05.2019

Judgment Reserved on: 21.02.2022

Judgment Passed on: 03.03.2022

                  

CORUM:

Sh. S.S. Malhotra (President)

Ms. Ritu Garodia (Member)

Sh. Ravi Kumar (Member)

 

Order By: Shri S.S. Malhotra, President

 

JUDGEMENT

1. By this order I shall dispose off the present complaint filed by the complainant against OP, inter-alia alleging unfair trade practice by the OP w.r.t. not refunding his amount despite having returned the policy within free look period. Brief facts as stated by the complainant in the complaint are, that in September 2018 one Shri Ashish Kumar Tripathi claiming himself to be the Manager of OP requested him to purchase one of the investment policy of OP for which complainant was not initially interested but on his persistent request, thereby explaining a good tax free return on investment, he agreed to accept the proposal of Mr. Ashish Kumar Tripathi on the condition that he shall be allowed some special benefit of being senior citizen which  Mr. Ashish Kumar Tripathi confirmed in writing in email dated 17.09.2018 upon which he purchased one policy and paid Rs.1,05,000/- on 17.09.2018. However, on 24.09.2018, when the complainant opened his Yahoo Email Account, he found one email from OP with an attachment containing the policy specifications and after going through the same, he observed that there was difference in the sum assured on maturity as also yearly premium mentioned in policy to that of, what was told to him by Mr. Triapthi, and he immediately sent an email to OP highlighting the differences in between the facts told to him and what was contained in the policy, and asked for refund of amount on 24.09.2018 itself. After 2-3 days a courier was sought to be delivered to him, but anticipating that it may be a policy documents, he didn’t receive the same, as he already had asked for refund of his amount. When he tried to speak with Mr. Tripathi, he declined to receive any communication and thereafter, he exchanged numerous email from his email account to OP’s email account i.e. service@bhartiaxalife.com inter-alia stating that he wants to return his policy within the free look period but he was shocked to receive an email inter-alia stating that the complainant wants to surrender the policy, which in fact not at all was surrendering the policy, but only was, for not taking the investment policy as he already had written a letter for refunding of the amount within free look period. Thereafter, the complainant wrote various emails and in total had written 119 emails to OP and he received 27 emails from OP but his amount was never refunded and aggrieved from the acts of the OP, he has filed the present complaint and prayed refund of Rs.1,05,000/- paid by complainant to OP, Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation on account of torturous attitude of OP and mental harassment, Rs.2,00,000/- cost of wastage of his time, Rs. One lack for litigation expenses.
2. OP was served but didn’t appear and was proceeded ex parte vide order dated 21.11.2019 and the complaint was allowed to file his ex parte evidence by way of affidavit which he filed  on 04.03.2020 and matter was adjourned for arguments.
3. Thereafter, on accounts of pandemic restrictions mater could not be taken up and finally the matter was taken on 01.02.2022 on which date one Shri Mukesh Kumar, Adv appeared for OP and he sought one week time to seek instructions for possible settlement, if any. But at this stage, the complainant had informed that the complainant had received an amount for Rs. 1,06,788/- into his bank account on 03.03.2021. The matter was kept for settlement for 08.02.2022 but on that date counsel for OP was not present and matter was fixed for orders. However, since, the order was under dictation it is being disposed off today itself.
4. The complainant has argued that the attitude of the OP is such that not only he didn’t return the amount despite timely intimation, within week’s period i.e. free look period but the OP even tried to withdraw an amount of Rs. 1,02,738/- on 10.09.2019 and again on 17.09.2019 towards the 2^nd installment of policy document which he had never taken, and for refund of which, the mails were being exchanged and written and if there would have been any amount on these dates in the bank account of the complainant,  the OP would have snatched the 2^nd installment of the policy also, which policy he never took. Apart from mental harassment for such illegal and unlawful and unlawful act of OP, the bank even charged him Rs. 200/- for each time alongwith GST of Rs. 36/- each time i.e. Rs. 478 in total, for the reason that there was no sufficient amount in his bank account. He further argued that the conduct of the OP not only falls within the definition of “deficiency in service” but it also amounts to cheating and committing extortion upon the complainant, as it is or at least should have been within the knowledge of legal cell of OP, its other departments that the complainant’s complaint for complete refund is pending and in these circumstances there should not have been any occasion qua the renewal. He further argued that  writing such numerous emails causes great mental stress, harassment, and adverse impact on his health, he being 77 years old senior citizen and as such exemplary compensation be given/awarded in such cases.
5. I have heard the arguments and perused the record. The conduct of the OP in this matter cannot be appreciated at all for the reason that initially the OP didn’t appear and was proceeded ex parte, OP never moved any application for setting aside the ex parte proceedings against them and then, when its counsel appeared on 1.2.2022, he stated that matter may be settled but thereafter again, none on behalf of OP appeared. The counsel for OP was not having any information that an amount of Rs.1,06,788/- has already been returned to the complainant and this fact was informed by complainant himself. From such conduct of the OP, and keeping in view the evidence led by the complainant, of which there is no rebuttal, the complainant has been able to prove that there was deficiency in service on the part of the OP and as such he is entitled to get compensation and he being a senior citizen even an exemplary compensation also.
6. Accordingly, the Commission is granted follows relief to the complainant:

1. OP is directed to pay interest @9% p.a. to complainant on the amount of Rs.1,05,000/- from the date of deposit i.e. 17.09.2018 to 03.03.2021.
2. The OP is directed to return an amount of Rs. 476/- with interest @9% p.a. from 10.09.2019 till realization of payment alongwith compensation of Rs. 15,000/- for attempting to snatch the 2^nd installment.
3. The OP is directed to pay the consolidated compensation to the complainant extend to Rs.25,000/- towards mental pain, harassment and legal expenses.

7. This order be complied with within 30 days from the date of receipt of the order.
8. Copy of the order be supplied / sent to the parties free of cost as per rules.
9. File be consigned to Record Room.

Announced on 03.03.2022

•  

 

 

(Ritu Garodia) Member

(Ravi Kumar) Member

(S.S. Malhotra) President