By: Smt. Mini Mathew, Member
Facts in brief
Complainant's father had taken a policy from the opposite parties for his son Amal babu, the complainant here in on 6.10.2007 and the policy number is 0410016121. The policy was for a period of 15 years and premium of Rs.6477/- was being paid half yearly. As per the terms and conditions of the policy complainant's father paid 6 installments towards premium totaling an amount of Rs.38862/- . At the time of taking the policy opposite parties informed that though the policy term was 15 years, the policy can be closed at any time after 3 years and maximum 20% hike will be obtained and minimum 8% will be obtained and on believing the words of the opposite parties the father of the complainant took the policy for the complainant.
After the completion of 3 years, when the complainant became major, the complainant approached the Kozhikkode office of the opposite party for surrendering the policy. At that time opposite parties informed the complainant that he is entitled only for an amount of Rs.33334.33 and they denied all the benefits. The complainant's father already had paid Rs.38862/- towards the premium. Complainant was not willing to accept the offer amount of Rs.33334.33 from the opposite parties and at that time the opposite parties informed that they would resolve the complaint of the complainant and also asked the complainant to accept the above high amount and hence complainant accepted the amount of Rs.33334.33/-. After that on several occasions complainant approached the office of the opposite parties for getting back the balance amount with benefits they were not ready to settle the legitimate claim of the complainant. By with holding its benefits the opposite parties have committed deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Hence this complaint.
After receiving notice from this Forum opposite parties entered appearance and filed their vakkalath on 4-11-14. On that day itself opposite parties filed I.A 389/14 stating that the policy number given in the complaint is C 410077623 and it is not that of the complainant and hence they wanted the complainant to furnish the correct policy details. After that on 17-12-14 complainant furnished the correct policy number before this forum with a memo stating that it was a typing mistake and the correct policy number is 0410016121. After that on 29-05-15 the opposite parties filed their version by denying all of the averements in the complainant.
After that complainant filed affidavit in lieu of chief examination in which he mentioned the correct policy number. Even after receiving the original policy number from the complainant the opposite parties filed their version before this forum by stating about policy number C 410077623 and about the policy of this complainant. Through the version the opposite parties contended that the policy number mentioned in the complaint was taken by one Lousiyamma Thomas and not by the father of the complainant. The amount paid by the complainant father also was disputed by the opposite parties. But they admits that they have already paid an amount of Rs.33334.33/- to the complainant and then there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and the complaint is to be dismissed with cost.
The main issues arise consideration are that
(1) Whether complainant is entitled for the balance amount of Rs.5525.67 along with its interest and cost.
(2) Whether opposite parties deficient in service?
(3) If so relief and cost.
Point No.1 and 2 answered together
Evidence placed before this forum by the complainant consists of Affidavit the lieu of chief examination and documents he produced were marked as Ext. A1 and A2. A1 is the receipt dated 6.10.2007 issued by the opposite parties to the father of the complainant after receiving an amount of Rs.6477/- towards payments of premium. Ext. A2 is the brochure issued by the opposite parties for showing about their business and its benefits. The specific case of the complainant is that he had paid Rs.38862/- before the opposite parties towards the premium. But he approached this forum with only one receipt. The policy copy is also not produced by the complainant. The specific case of the complainant is that he had received an amount of Rs. 33334.33 from the office of the opposite party at Kozhikkode. But the date on which the complainant has received the above said amount is silent in the complaint and affidavit. But this fact is admitted by the opposite parties. The next question arises for consideration is whether the complainant has paid Rs.38862/- to the opposite parties. In the complaint itself complainant has stated this fact. Even though the complainant has not produced all the receipts for all the payments he made to the opposite parties his evidence before this forum clearly substantiate his case that he had paid Rs.38862 to the opposite parties. His affidavit filed in lieu of chief examination stands unchallenged. The opposite parties did not care to cross examine him therefore this forum finds that complainant had paid the opposite parties Rs.38862/-. The opposite parties admits the case of the complainant that he was paid Rs.33334.33/- by them. The forum finds that opposite parties are bound to pay the balance amount of Rs.5525.67/- to the complainant. After filing affidavit of the complainant the opposite parties were given sufficient opportunities for adducing their evidence. But they have not cared to do so. There is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties.
The Consumer Protection Act is definitely a beneficial legislation and therefore the provisions of the Act must receive a liberal construction. This forum has noticed that the complainant in the above matter has not taken any steps to amend the complainant despite the opposite parties has pointed out the mistake with regard to the policy number mentioned in the complaint. The complainant later produced the policy which contains the correct number. We are of the considered opinion that even though the complainant has not taken any steps to amend the complaint it will not in any way affect his case especially the opposite parties admit the transaction detailed in the complaint as well as in the affidavit filed by the complainant in lieu of the chief examination. More over the evidence given by the complainant stands unchallenged. Hence we partly allow this complaint.
In the result, the opposite parties are directed to pay the complainant Rs.5525.67. The opposite parties are directed to pay Rs.2500/- towards the mental agony and hard ships suffered by complainant and Rs.2500/- as cost. This order shall be complied with in one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. If these amounts are not paid to the complainant within one month from the date of this order the opposite parties are liable to pay 9% interest for the above said amount till the date of payment.
Dated this 4th day of April, 2016
A.A.VIJAYAN, PRESIDENT
R.K.MADANAVALLY , MEMBER
MINI MATHEW, MEMBER
APPENDIX
Witness examined on the side of the complainant : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the complainant : Ext.A1to A2
Ext.A1 : Receipt
Ext.A2 : Brochure
Witness examined on the side of the opposite party : Nil
Documents marked on the side of the opposite party : Nil
A.A.VIJAYAN, PRESIDENT
R.K.MADANAVALLY , MEMBER
MINI MATHEW, MEMBER
