The case of the complainant Bipin Mukherjee is that he is a former Dist. Judge and former President of Dist. Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum of different Districts of West Bengal and he is permanent resident of Old Dangalpara, Suri, Birbhum.
It is the case of the complainant, in brief, that about opening of three years term policy one Rajat Roy, Sales Executive of the O.P Company along with one Mousona Chatterjee happened to be ex-student of his wife Smt. Nibedita Chakaraborty(Mukherjee) came to him. So, they relied upon them and Rajat Roy filled up entire form and submitted the same to Suri office. Subsequently policy document was received and it was detected that the same was for 13 years and the matter was reported to said Rajat Roy and in fact the complainant asked him for what reasons such type of policy was opened without his consent and knowledge, when the said Rajat Roy expressed that it was fault of the office and assured him that after payment of three continuous premium he would arrange for withdrawal of the deposited amount, when the complainant relied upon him and said Rajat Roy paid second premium of the policy at Suri office of O.P No.1. But when third year came said Rajat Roy came to him along with that lady and collected cheque for third premium along with signatures in blank form and one payout form of O.P and one cancelled cheque and disclosed that the policy shall be closed being policy No. 18393919 dated 11.01.2011 on 11.02.2014 and the said documents were received by said Rajat Roy at the house of the complainant.
It is the further case of the complainant that very curiously enough that after some period again he received another policy documents bearing policy No. 7846642218 and on perusal it was found that it was nothing but a new policy and about 1st policy there was no whisper in the said 2nd policy. When the complainant made contact with the person who met him at Barasat Forum office and collected the said insurance policy document he disclosed that they shall take step but thereafter they did nothing.
Lastly, the complainant lodged a complaint at Barasat Office bearing complaint No. 50622325 but no result was found. However, through mobile message he got one claim docket No. 9071 and one massager of the O.Ps Suresh Tiwari returned 2nd policy document when he tried to talk with Rajat Roy and said lady over phone, but they were not available and ultimately said phone numbers were found not in existence.
It is the further case of the complainant that thereafter on proper scrutiny of the 2nd policy document papers it was found that the document in which the complainant signed in blank form etc. is D-5403087 but 2nd policy was prepared in form No. D-4777997 and in fact in that paper in the last page it was not the signature of the complainant and everything was superimposed by O.Ps office.
Moreover, there was no agent name or corporate agent name and no mobile of the complainant. But the said Rajat Roy gave a mobile number to him to avoid the complainant.
Complainant never saw any witness to sign in the two policies and not known to him.
Facts remains that the complainant never went to any office of the O.Ps for submitting the application form for opening the alleged two policies.
It is the further case of the complainant that in reality no consent form was collected by the O.Ps or their corporate agent before accepting the policy but it is mandatory provision as per IRDA Rules and ultimately said Rajat Roy Sales Executive of the office with their men Mousona Chatterjee by deliberate concealment and misrepresentation prepared those policies by filling up those forms behind back and knowledge of the complainant and thereby practice fraud upon the complainant, which was reported to President and Executive Director of O.P No.2 by sending letter dated 24.11.2014 and against that O.Ps consumer service sent reply dated 28.11.2014 and apologized and a complaint being No. 1411293507 was registered by the O.Ps .
Thereafter O.Ps confirmed that the complaint No. 1411293507 dated 28.11.2014 has been resolved and the complaint has been addressed to complainant’s satisfaction. But when the complainant made talk with them over phone they only told that a meager amount would be paid what would be assessed after submission of the original papers.
But even after their admission of resolving the present dispute as per complainant’s satisfaction O.Ps are harassing the complainant and same is being done continuously which has caused metal pain agony to him.
It is the next case of the complainant that in fact the O.Ps are serving consumer in negligent and deficient manner which would be established from their act that they apologized for their unfair conduct and admitted that grievance of the complainant was resolved as per the complainant’s satisfaction.
Hence this case for directing the O.Ps to refund entire deposited three premium amount i.e. Rs. 1,50,000/- to the complainant and for imposing heavy cost upon them for giving false information, misrepresentation and practice fraud upon the complainant and for directing them to pay compensation of Rs. 10,000/- for causing mental pain, agony and harassment to the complainant.
In the present case notices were sent to the both O.Ps through registered post with A/D.
A/D card of O.P No.1 Branch Manager, Reliance Life Insurance Company, Suri Branch, Birbhum has been returned back after due service with proper seal, date and signature of the said office. O.P No.1 received the same on 01.12.2016 but none appeared on their behalf in the present case and the case has been heard ex parte against O.P No.1.
Regarding O.P No.2 the President and Executive Director Reliance Life Insurance Company Ltd. Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, we find from the track report shows that the said notice was duly delivered to the O.P No.2 by post man on 05.12.2016.
On 27.04.17 O.P No.2 appeared before this Forum through Shri Achintya Chatterjee, Ld. Advocate and prayed for time for filing W.V. Prayer was allowed. On 30.05.17 and 05.07.17 the O.P No.2 also prayed for time. But thereafter O.P No. 2 backed out from the case and the case has been heard ex parte against them.
Point for determination.
- Whether the complainant is a consumer under Sec. 2(1)(d)(ii) of the C.P. Act.?
- Whether this Forum has jurisdiction to try this case?
- Whether the case is barred by limitation or not?
- Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the O.P.?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get any other relief or reliefs as prayed for?
DECISION WITH REASONS
During the trial the complainant Bipin Mukherjee has been examined as PW1 and also filed some documents.
Heard argument.
Point No.1:: Evidently the complainant has invested in the Insurance policy of the O.Ps by paying three (3) installments of Rs. 50,000/- each totaling Rs. 1,50,000/-.
So, the complainant is a consumer U/s 2(1)(d)(ii) of the C.P. Act.
Point No.2:: O.P No.1 is Branch Office within jurisdiction of this Forum. O.P No.2 is President and Executive Director of Reliance L.I.C having head office at Mumbai.
The complainant has obtained permission of the Forum U/s 11(2)(b) of C.P Act to proceed against both the O.Ps.
The total valuation of the case is Rs. 1,60.000/- plus compensation for fraud and misrepresentation which is far less than maximum limit of the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Forum i.e. Rs. 20,00,000/-.
So, this Forum has pecuniary and territorial jurisdiction to try this case.
Point No.3:: We find that cause of action of this case arose on 24.12.14 when the complainant received letter regarding disposal of his complaint dated 28.11.14 and before that several correspondence were made between the complainant and O.Ps.
The present case was filed on 16.11.2016.
So, the case has been filed within period of limitation i.e. two years.
More so, we find that the complainant had been serving as President of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum upto 13.06.16. So, legally it was not possible for him to file any complaint within that period.
So, it can be safely concluded that the present case is not barred by limitation.
Point No. 4 and 5:: Both points are taken up together for convenience of discussion as they are related to each other.
The complainant Bipin Mukherjee in his complaint and evidence on oath stated that he intended to obtain a three years terms policy of the O.Ps Reliance Life Insurance Co. and for this purpose one Rajat Roy, Sales Executive of the O.P Company along with one Mousona Chatterjee happened to be ex-student of his wife Smt. Nibedita Chakaraborty(Mukherjee) came to him. Due to such relation between Mousona Chatterjee and wife of the complainant they relied upon them and Rajat Roy filled up entire form and submitted the same to Suri office. Subsequently policy document was received and it was detected that the same was for 13 years and the matter was reported to said Rajat Roy and in fact the complainant asked him for what reasons such type of policy was opened without his consent and knowledge, when the said Rajat Roy expressed that it was fault of the office and assured him that after payment of three continuous premium he would arrange for withdrawal of the deposited amount, when the complainant relied upon him and said Rajat Roy paid second premium of the policy at Suri office of O.P No.1. But when third year came said Rajat Roy came to him along with that lady and collected cheque for third premium along with signatures in blank form and one payout form of O.P and one cancelled cheque and disclosed that the policy shall be closed being policy No. 18393919 dated 11.01.2011 on 11.02.2014.
He further stated that sometime after he again received another policy documents bearing policy No. 7846642218 and on perusal it was found that it was nothing but a new policy and about 1st policy there was no whisper in the said 2nd policy. When the complainant made contact with the person who met him at Barasat Forum office and collected the said insurance policy document he disclosed that they shall take step but thereafter they did nothing and he lodged a complaint before Barasat Office being complaint No. 50622325 but no result received.
Copy of the policy certificate No. 18393919 dated 11.01.11 shows that said certificate was issued in favour of the complainant Bipin Mukherjee w.e.f 11.01.2011 under Reliance Cash Flow Plan for policy term 13 years with sum assured 5 lakhs and premium of Rs. 50312.94p per year.
Copy of the policy certificate No. 50622925 shows that said certificate was also issued to the complainant w.e.f 31.12.12 under Reliance Life Insurance Money Back Plan for policy term 15 years with sum assured Rs 203600/- and premium of Rs. 49998.65p per year.
It is the case of the complainant that he paid Rs. 150000/- to the O.Ps as premium.
Copy of the 1st premium receipt dated 11.01.11 of the policy No. 18393919 shows that Rs. 50312.94p has been deposited by the complainant as 1st premium.
Copy of the 1st premium receipt dated 31.12.12 of policy No. 51622925 shows that Rs. 49998.65p has been deposited by the complainant as 1st premium of the said policy.
Copy of the Cheque No. 344544 dated 25.12.12 issued by the complainant shows that cheque of Rs. 50000/- has been issued in favour of the O.Ps Reliance Life Insurance Co.
So, it is clear that the complainant has paid Rs. 150000/- to the O.Ps Reliance Life Insurance Co. as premium.
The complainant in his evidence further stated that after consulting Xerox copies of forms and blank cheque he found that actually he signed application form No. D-5403097 only in first page and inside page but 2nd policy document was issued on the basis of application No. D-4777997 and entire part was written by unknown person but he did not handover said application form No. D-4777997 for any 2nd policy. More so, signature of Nivedita Chakarborty in 3rd page of said application and her voter and PAN card in Xerox form are not the signature of Nivedita Chakraborty.
He in his evidence also stated that signature of last page of said application was not of him but some factious person sign their names. So, it is apparently proved that Reliance Life Insurance Office are behind the whole game in opening such factious documents (2nd policy). The witness as signatory has shown in the application are not known to him and such person were not present at the time of signing blank forms. He never handed over any application to any corporate office. But everything was done by Rajat Roy purposely for which the 2nd application there is no mention of any corporate office or agent or any other person.
He further stated that in the 1st policy his address and phone numbers are duly printed. But in the 2nd policy some unknown phone number noted and address was noted as per their wish though 1st policy confirmed his address and phone number and said was done purposely by Rajat Roy and Mousona Chatterjee with intention so that if any confirmation is required by Reliance Life Insurance office it would not be possible to contact him.
The complainant Bipin Mukherjee in his evidence further stated that in reality no consent form was collected by the O.Ps or their corporate agent before accepting the policy but it is mandatory provision as per
IRDA Rules and ultimately said Rajat Roy Sales Executive of the office with their men Mousona Chatterjee by deliberate concealment and misrepresentation prepared those policies by filling up those forms behind back and knowledge of the complainant and thereby practice fraud upon the complainant.
We find that in the present case the complainant by filing evidence on affidavit made serious allegation against the Officer and agent of the Co. that they misrepresented him and practice fraud upon him and prepared another policies behind his knowledge by forging his signature and using signed blank form.
But the O.Ps Insurance Co. has not come forward to his Forum to challenge such serious allegation against them inspite of several and sufficient opportunity.
In view of the ruling reported in IV2006CPJ 2013(NC) wherein a complaint case the complainant filed an affidavit by way of evidence but the O.Ps neither filed any evidence by way of affidavit nor cross examined the deponent. Hon’ble National Commission pleased to hold that allegation of the complainant remained uncontroverted and in absence of any counter affidavit case of the complainant stands prove.
More so, we find from the copy of the letter sent to the complainant by one Amitabha Aich, Head Consumer Care, regarding his complaint of tampering, corrections, forgery of proposal or relates paper he was informed that “ we confirmed that your complaint No. 1411293507 dated 28.11.14 has been resolved. We hope that your complaint has been addressed to your complete satisfaction.”
So, it is clear from the above noted letter that O.Ps have assured that the complainant get complete satisfaction regarding his grievance but they did nothing rather according to complainant he was informed by phone that he would get a meager amount.
During hearing of argument the complainant has submitted a copy of judgement passed in FA No. A/117/2015 by Hon’ble State Commission, West Bengal where in a consumer case on 03.05.11 the first policy was taken by the complainant from the O.P Insurance Co. on the basis of single premium but the same shown as for 10 years premium, and ultimately she continued with the policy for 3 years. Only one application form was initially filed up by the complainant, but several policies were created and issued by Insurance Co. copying her signature, only to create fund of the Insurance Co. The complainant filed a case before Dist. Forum which was allowed.
On appeal Hon’ble State Commission has been pleased to hold that the factum of miss-selling is clear, vivid and apparent. There has been latches and deficient functioning of the service provider towards the complainant. Accordingly, rightly the complainant case has been allowed by the Ld. Dist. Forum. The award of refund of the entire premium is rightful one.
But Hon’ble State Commission has been pleased to strike of remaining portion of the order of the Dist. Forum and the appeal was allowed in part.
Considering overall matter into consideration and materials on record and relying upon the rulings cited above we are constrained to hold that the complainant has been able to prove his case and deficiency in service and illegal trade practice by the O.Ps have been duly proved.
Accordingly the O.Ps are directed to pay Rs. 150000/- to the complainant as entire premium money. The O.Ps are also directed to pay Rs. 30000/- as lump sum compensation for causing mental pain, agony, harassment, and committing fraud and misrepresentation.
Thus these points are decided in favour of the complainant. The case succeeds.
Proper fees have been paid.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
that C.F case No. 135/2016 be and the same is allowed on ex parte against O.Ps with a cost of Rs. 2000/-.
The O.Ps (1) Branch Manager, Reliance Life Insurance Company Ltd., Suri Branch, P.O and P.S Suri, Dist. Birbhum and (2) President and Executive Director, Reliance Life Insurance Company Ltd. D.A K City, Navi Mumbai, Maharastra.400710 are directed to pay Rs. 150000/- to the complainant as entire premium money. The O.Ps are also directed to pay Rs. 30000/- as lump sum compensation for causing mental pain, agony, harassment, and committing fraud and misrepresentation to the complainant, within one month from the date of this order failing which the complainant shall be at liberty to execute the order as per law and procedure.
Copy of this order be supplied to the parties each free of cost.
