DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BARNALA, PUNJAB.
Complaint Case No: CC/97/2023
Date of Institution: 10.08.2023
Date of Decision: 14.11.2024
Gurcharan Singh aged about 61 year son of Sh. Gurnam Singh, resident of Sandhu Patti, Village Sekha, Tehsil and District Barnala.
…Complainant
Versus
1. Canara HSBC Life Insurance Company, S.C.O No. 3, First Floor, Madhya Marg, Above State Bank of India, Sector 26, Chandigarh PIN-160019, through its Manager/Authorized Signatory.
2. Punjab National Bank, Branch K.C. Road, Barnala, District Barnala, through its Branch Manager.
…Opposite Parties
Complaint Under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Present: Sh. Gurpreetpal Singh Adv counsel for complainant.
Sh. Dhiraj Kumar Adv counsel for opposite party No. 1.
Sh. A.K. Jindal Adv counsel for opposite party No. 2.
Quorum.-
1. Sh. Ashish Kumar Grover: President
2. Smt. Urmila Kumari: Member
3. Sh. Navdeep Kumar Garg: Member
(ORDER BY ASHISH KUMAR GROVER PRESIDENT):
The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 against Canara HSBC Life Insurance Company, S.C.O No. 3, First Floor, Madhya Marg, Above State Bank of India, Sector 26, Chandigarh PIN-160019, through its Manager/Authorized Signatory & others (in short the opposite parties).
2. The facts leading to the present complaint are that the complainant is the permanent resident of Village Sekha, Tehsil and District Barnala and is Account Holder of Punjab National Bank under Account No.0594100100000046 since 03.02.2021. It is alleged that the complainant is illiterate person and do not know reading or writing except to put his signatures in Punjabi language and the complainant usually deposits his savings in the form of FDRs (Fixed Deposit Receipts) in the above said Account of PNB. It is further alleged that in the month of November 2021, the complainant went to PNB and asked to make FDRs of Rs.5,80,000/- and Rs.2,80,000/- after withdrawing the said amounts from his above said account and one Jyoti was present, who represented herself as an employee of the Bank and got the signatures of the complainant on certain documents and assured the complainant that his FDRs will be delivered to him at his house within few days. It is alleged that after the elapse of some days the complainant again made a contact by way of making phone call on the number, given by said Jyoti but the said Jyoti did not give the plain answer rather told the complainant that his papers of FDRs will get time as the system of Bank is not working properly and later on the above said Jyoti came at the house of the complainant in the month of February 2022 and handed over all the papers and also told the complainant that he may withdraw the amount after one year, as he usually do. It is further alleged that in the month of November 2022 the complainant received the call for deposit of next installment of the Policy No.0135139114 and Policy No.0137904820 operating under the Canara Bank via PNB issued by Canara HSBC Life Insurance Company. It is alleged that the complainant was astonished after hearing the said call that what type of these FDRs are in which the Bank demands money again rather than to renew the same and the complainant came to know that these are not FDRs, but these are the Life Insurance Policies in which certain amount is to be deposited annually. It is further alleged that the complainant thereafter moved an application before The Governor, Reserve Bank of India, Mumbai regarding the above said misrepresentation and fraud and thereafter on 15.03.2023, the opposite parties credited the above said account of complainant with the amounts of Rs.5,80,000/- and Rs.2,80,000/- by way of NEFT and the same were debited by the opposite parties from the account of complainant on 08.11.2021 and 14.12.2021 respectively and were returned back by the opposite parties in the Account of complainant after about 16 months, but without disbursing any interest accrued upon the above said amounts. It is further alleged that the complainant sent legal notice dated 24.04.2023 to the opposite parties by way of Registered Post dated 26.04.2023 calling upon them to disburse the amount of Rs.1,01,100/- as interest accrued upon the above said amounts credited in the account of complainant, along with the amount of Rs.50,000/- as compensation and the same duly received by the opposite parties but to no effect till now. As such, the act and conduct of the opposite parties comes within the definition of the unfair trade practice as well as deficiency in service. Hence, the present complaint is filed for seeking the following reliefs.-
- The opposite parties may be directed to disburse the amount of Rs.1,01,100/- as interest accrued upon the above said amounts credited in the account of complainant, along with the amount of Rs.50,000/- as compensation for physical pain, mental agony, financial loss and inconvenience to the complainant and Rs. 20,000/- as litigation expenses.
3. Upon notice of this complaint, the opposite party No. 1 appeared and filed written version by taking preliminary objections on the ground that the complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed. It is further alleged that in the present case the complainant had purchased Policy No. 9101498603 with the risk commencement date being 08.11.2021 and Policy No. 9101550638 with the risk commencement date being 14.12.2021 from the OP No.1 Company through Punjab National Bank and the complainant paid the first premium installment at the time of taking the policies and the next premium which were due next year was not paid by the complainant and thereafter the complainant made request for refund of the premiums under the policies in February 2023 i.e. way beyond the expiry of the Free-Look Period. It is further alleged that the policies were issued on the basis of duly submitted Policy Application Form/Tab Addendum Form received from the complainant although no adverse finding was there in the issuance of the policy but purely as a goodwill service gesture decided to refund the premium amounts under both the policies and sent a letter dated 6th March 2023 to the complainant regarding the same. It is further alleged that on receipt of the KYC documents and the Policy Documents the insurance company duly refunded the premium amounts under both the polices on 15th March 2015 and credit the amount of Rs. 5,80,000/- and 2,80,000/- in the Punjab National Bank account of the complainant, therefore the company has acted in a bonafide manner and refunded the amount purely as a matter of Good Gesture without any fault on their part and hence the OP No. 1 company is not liable to pay any interest, compensation etc. It is further alleged that an insurance policy is issued as per the request submitted by the proposer and in the present case the subject policies were issued completely as per the request submitted by the complainant herein and he was given a period of 15 days for verification and after the said verification or free-look period since no counter offer or any alterations were requested, the insurance contract became mutually binding as the terms were mutually agreed, accepted and deliberated between both the parties. On merits, the opposite party No. 1 reiterated the averments as mentioned in the preliminary objections and denied the all other allegations of the complaint and prayed for the dismissal of complaint.
4. The opposite party No. 2 filed separate written version by taking legal objections on the grounds that the complaint of the complainant is bad for mis-joinder and non-joinder of necessary parties. It is alleged that it is settled principle of law under Section 230 of Indian Contract Act that an agent can neither sue nor be sued, as the Bank OP No. 2 was only the corporate agent of the insurance company, the complaint to be dismissed on this ground alone also. The complainant has got no locus-standi or cause of action to file the present complaint against the opposite party. The complainant paid alleged amounts to Canara HSBC Life Insurance Company through NEFT on 15-03-2023.
5. On merits, it is admitted that the complainant is the customer of the OP and he maintains his saving account with the answering OP and the complainant and the complainant himself directed to the answering OP to transfer the amounts of Rs. 5,80,000/- and Rs. 2,80,000/- through RTGS in favour of the OP No.1 and the answering OP after considering the request of the complainant transferred the said amount to the OP No.1, from whom the complainant purchased the Insurance Policy. It is denied that the Miss Jyoti is the employee of the OP No.2. It is submitted that the complainant himself purchased these policies on 08.11.2021 and 14.12.2021 and the present complaint has been filed by the complainant on 10.07.2023, after the lapse of more than 18 months and the complainant enjoyed the fruits of these policies from the date of its purchase till 10.07.2023 and the complainant raised the objection first time on 24.04.2023, when the complainant served legal notice through his counsel upon the OPS. It is further alleged that the complainant falsely mentioned the name of alleged Jyoti in his complaint which is not the employee of the answering OP No.2 nor OP No.2 have any concern with said alleged Jyoti. All other allegations of the complaint are denied and prayed for the dismissal of complaint.
6. Ld. Counsel for the complainant on 6.2.2024 has suffered the statement that I do not want to file any rejoinder against the version of opposite parties.
7. The complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant as Ex.C-1, copy of statement of account dated 07.01.2023 as Ex.C-2, copy of application as Ex.C-3, copy of statement of account dated 21.04.2023 as Ex.C-4, copy of legal notice as Ex.C-5, copies of postal receipt as Ex.C-6 & C-7, copy of adhaar card as Ex.C-8 and closed the evidence.
8. Ld. Counsel for opposite party No. 1 suffered the statement that I do not want to tender any evidence on behalf of opposite party No.1 and the same is closed.
9. The opposite party No. 2 tendered into evidence affidavit of Bhushan Kumar as Ex.OP2/1, copy of statement of account as Ex.OP2/2, copies of vouchers are Ex.OP2/3 & OP2/4 and closed the evidence.
10. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file. Written arguments filed by opposite party No. 1 & 2.
11. Ld. Counsel for the complainant argued that the complainant is Account Holder of Punjab National Bank under Account No.0594100100000046 since 03.02.2021 and the complainant is illiterate person and do not know reading or writing except to put his signatures in Punjabi language and the complainant usually deposits his savings in the form of FDRs (Fixed Deposit Receipts) in the above said Account of PNB. It is further argued that in the month of November 2021 the complainant went to PNB and asked to make FDRs of Rs.5,80,000/- and Rs.2,80,000/- after withdrawing the said amounts from his above said account and one Jyoti who represented herself as an employee of the Bank and got the signatures of the complainant on certain documents and assured the complainant that his FDRs will be delivered to him at his house within few days. It is further argued that after the elapse of some days the complainant again made a contact by way of making phone call on the number given by said Jyoti but the said Jyoti did not give the plain answer rather told the complainant that his papers of FDRs will get time as the system of Bank is not working properly and later on the above said Jyoti came at the house of the complainant in the month of February 2022 and handed over all the papers and also told the complainant that he may withdraw the amount after one year, as he usually do. It is further argued that in the month of November 2022 the complainant received the call for deposit of next installment of the Policy No.0135139114 and Policy No.0137904820 operating under the Canara Bank via PNB issued by Canara HSBC Life Insurance Company. It is further argued that the complainant thereafter moved an application before The Governor, Reserve Bank of India, Mumbai regarding the above said misrepresentation and fraud and thereafter on 15.03.2023, the opposite parties credited the above said account of complainant with the amounts of Rs.5,80,000/- and Rs.2,80,000/- by way of NEFT which were debited by the opposite parties from the account of complainant on 08.11.2021 and 14.12.2021 respectively and were returned back by the opposite parties in the account of complainant after about 16 months, but without disbursing any interest accrued upon the above said amounts. It is further argued that the complainant sent legal notice dated 24.04.2023 to the opposite parties by way of Registered Post dated 26.04.2023 calling upon them to disburse the amount of Rs.1,01,100/- as interest accrued upon the above said amounts credited in the account of complainant, along with the amount of Rs.50,000/- as compensation and the same duly received by the opposite parties but to no effect till now.
12. Ld. Counsel for the opposite party No. 1 argued that in the present case the complainant had purchased Policy No. 9101498603 with the risk commencement date being 08.11.2021 and Policy No. 9101550638 with the risk commencement date being 14.12.2021 from the opposite party No.1 through Punjab National Bank and the complainant paid the first premium installment at the time of taking the policies and the next premium which were due next year was not paid by the complainant and thereafter the complainant made request for refund of the premiums under the policies in February 2023 i.e. way beyond the expiry of the Free-Look Period. It is further argued that the policies were issued on the basis of duly submitted Policy Application Form/Tab Addendum Form received from the complainant, but purely as a goodwill service gesture decided to refund the premium amounts under both the policies and sent a letter dated 6th March 2023 to the complainant regarding the same. It is further argued that on receipt of the KYC documents and the Policy Documents the insurance company duly refunded the premium amounts under both the polices on 15th March 2015 and credit the amount of Rs. 5,80,000/- and 2,80,000/- in the Punjab National Bank account of the complainant, therefore the company has acted in a bonafide manner and refunded the amount purely as a matter of Good Gesture without any fault on its part, as such the opposite party No. 1 is not liable to pay any interest. It is further argued that an insurance policy is issued as per the request submitted by the proposer and in the present case the subject policies were issued completely as per the request submitted by the complainant herein and he was given a period of 15 days for verification and after the said verification or free-look period since no counter offer or any alterations were requested.
13. Ld. Counsel for the opposite party No. 2 argued that the complainant himself directed to the opposite party No. 2 to transfer the amounts of Rs. 5,80,000/- and Rs. 2,80,000/- through RTGS in favour of the opposite party No. 1 from whom the complainant purchased the Insurance Policy. It is further argued that the complainant himself purchased these policies on 08.11.2021 and 14.12.2021 and the present complaint has been filed by the complainant on 10.07.2023 after the lapse of more than 18 months and the complainant enjoyed the fruits of these policies from the date of its purchase till 10.07.2023 and the complainant raised the objection first time on 24.04.2023, when the complainant served legal notice through his counsel upon the opposite parties. It is further argued that the complainant falsely mentioned the name of alleged Jyoti in his complaint which is not the employee of the opposite party No. 2 nor they have any concern with said alleged Jyoti.
14. We have gone through the facts and evidence produced by the parties. The complainant has placed on record copy of statement of account dated 7.1.2023 Ex.C-2 which shows that an amount of Rs. 5,80,000/- has been debited from the account of complainant on 8.11.2021 for Choice New Business Payment and on 14.12.2021 an amount of Rs. 2,80,000/- has been debited from the account of complainant for the same purpose. The complainant has further placed on record copy of statement of account dated 21.4.2023 Ex.C-4 which shows that on 15.3.2023 an amount of Rs. 5,80,000 and Rs. 2,80,000/- have been credited in the account of complainant through NEFT CANARA HSBC LIFE INSURNACE COMPANY. On the other hand, Ld. Counsel for the opposite party No. 2 argued that the complainant himself directed to the opposite party No. 2 to transfer the amounts of Rs. 5,80,000/- and Rs. 2,80,000/- through RTGS in favour of the opposite party No. 1 from whom the complainant purchased the Insurance Policy on 08.11.2021 and 14.12.2021 and the present complaint has been filed by the complainant on 10.07.2023 after the lapse of more than 18 months and the complainant enjoyed the fruits of these policies from the date of its purchase till 10.07.2023. The opposite party No. 2 placed on record copy of Combo Transfer Vouchers dated 8.11.2021 and 14.12.2021 Ex.O.P2/3 & Ex.O.P2/4 vide which an amount of Rs. 5,80,000/- and Rs. 2,80,000/- have been transferred by the said Gurcharan Singh in favour of Applications No. 9101499970 & 9101524588 respectively. Further in the above said vouchers it is mentioned that “Telephonic Confirmation from Gurcharan Singh about Policy” and the above said vouchers were duly signed by Gurcharan Singh. Ld. Counsel for the opposite party No. 1 further argued that the policies were issued on the basis of duly submitted Policy Application Form/Tab Addendum Form received from the complainant but purely as a goodwill service gesture on receipt of the KYC documents and the Policy Documents the insurance company duly refunded the premium amounts under both the polices on 15th March 2015 and credited the amount of Rs. 5,80,000/- and 2,80,000/- in the Punjab National Bank account of the complainant and this fact is also admitted by the complainant in his complaint. Moreover, from the perusal of copy of account statement Ex.C-4 it established that an amount of Rs. 5,80,000/- and Rs. 2,80,000/- have been credited by the insurance company in the bank account of the complainant through NEFT on 15.3.2023.
15. Now the complainant in the present complaint has sought the interest amount of Rs. 1,01,100/- on the above said amounts from the opposite parties. We have observed that the complainant has not come to the Commission with clean hands as the complainant concealed that he has transferred the above said amounts through his bank account in favour of the insurance company for purchasing the insurance policies. Moreover, life of complainant was covered under the above mentioned policies for said period. It seems that the complainant created false story in his complaint to grab the more money illegally from the opposite parties. The complainant has got no cause of action to file the present complaint as complainant has already received the premium amounts of the policies. So, there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties. Therefore, the present complaint is dismissed without costs. Copy of the order be supplied to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the records after its due compliance.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COMMISSION:
14th Day of November, 2024
(Ashish Kumar Grover)
President
(Urmila Kumari)
Member
(Navdeep Kumar Garg)
Member
