| Final Order / Judgement | BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM CACHAR :: SILCHAR Con. Case No. 29 of 2011 Sri Surendra Rudra Paul, ………………………………… Complainant. -V/S- 1. ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Co. Ltd., (Represented by its Branch Manager) Hospital Road, Silchar Dist. Cachar, Assam…………………………………… Opp. Party Present: - Sri Bishnu Debnath, President, District Consumer Forum, Cachar, Silchar. Mrs. Chandana Purkayastha, Member, District Consumer Forum, Cachar, Silchar. Shri Kamal Kumar Sarda, Member, District Consumer Forum, Cachar, Silchar. Appeared :- Sri Ajoy Kumar Choudhury, Advocate for the complainant. Sri Bhaskar Deb, Advocate for the O.P. Date of Evidence 03-12-2011 Date of written argument 29-08-2013 Date of judgment 12-12-2017 JUDGMENT AND ORDER Sri Bishnu Debnath, - The case has been brought by Sri Surendra Rudra Paul under Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for award of compensation on the allegation that he purchased Insurance Policy from ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Co. Ltd., Silchar Branch. The first premium was Rs.8,000/-. He paid premium but on 18-06-2009 on receiving the policy certificated noticed that name of his son Sri Shankar Rudra Paul has been recorded as life assured in place of his name. Accordingly, he raised objection but the O.P refused to make correct the insurance certificate. Hence, he brought this case.
- The O.P did not submit W/S but during hearing of this case submit deposition Ms. Kshama Priyadarshini, the Senior Manager, legal and also submitted written argument. The complainant also deposed on oath and submitted some documents including original insurance policy.
- Perused the written argument, the evidence on record and other materials from the Ext-1 it is revealed that the life assured was Mr. Shankar Rudra Paul and proposer is the complainant but in Ext-2 name of assured is written Sri Surendra Rudra Paul. So, it is evidently clear that in the insurance policy name of son of the complainant is written wrongly.
- However, from evidence on record it is admitted fact that the policy has been discontinued and the amount of premium of Rs.8,000/- has been refunded by Bank cheque in favour of the son of the complainant and the complainant admitted the acceptance of the said amount. But the plea of the complainant is that due to mistake of the complainant he suffered monetary loss for which he want compensation.
- In view of the evidence on record and perusal of written argument we are of opinion that due to negligence of the O.P the above mentioned mistake was done. So, the complainant entitled not only cost of the proceeding but also lump sum compensation.
- Hence, by applying our prudent mind the total compensation including cost of the proceeding is determined as Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten thousand) only. Of course, the amount of premium of Rs.8,000/- has already been refunded. So, the O.P is directed to pay now Rs.10,000/- within 45 days. If fail, interest @ 10% per annum on the above amount of Rs.10,000/- to be added w.e.f today till realization of the full.
- With the above, this case is disposed of on contest. Supply free certified copy to the parties immediately. Given under hand and seal of this District Forum on this the 12th day of December, 2017.
| |
