Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Amritsar.
Complaint No.364-14
Date of institution : 8.7.2014
Date of decision : 11.3.2015
S.Balraj Singh son of Sh.Rattan Singh, resident of Village Manj, Tehsil Ajnala, Amritsar. Punjab.
..............Complainant
Versus
Canara HSBC OBC Life Insurance Co.Ltd., through its Company Secretary/Managing Director/Director/Authorized Person having its registered office at “Unitech Trade Center, 2nd Floor, Sushant lok, Phase I, Sector 43, Gurgaon-122009.
Canara HSBC OBC Life Insurance Co.Ltd., through its Company Secretary/Managing Director/Director/Authorized Person at 32-A, 3rd Floor, Cee Tee Mall, Mall Road, Amritsar- 143001.
...............Opposite parties
Complaint under section 11 & 12 of the Consumer Protection Act
Present : For the complainant : In person
For the opposite party : Sh.Punnet Krishan Joshi and Danish Bansal, Advocate
QUORUM : Sh.Bhupinder Singh, President, Sh.Anoop Sharma, Member and Ms.Kulwant Kaur Bajwa, Member
Order Dictated by :
Sh.Bhupinder Singh, President
Present complaint has been filed by Sh.Balraj Singh under the provisions of Consumer Protection Act alleging therein that opposite party No.2 approached the complainant through its agent Mr.Maninderjit Singh
-2-
who persuaded him to get an insurance policy from the opposite party with guarantee returns of 10.50% p.a.with the assurance that he could withdraw the money after one year. The complainant opted to obtain a policy and paid Rs.50000/- through cheque dated 14.12.2013 for application No.1200193174. It was further alleged that the complainant after one year approached the opposite party No.2 for encashment of the policy alongwith the documents which he had received by post. But the officials of the opposite party No.2 refused to encash the policy and told the complainant that it is a regular policy and he has to pay premium for 10 years and maturity of the policy is after 15 years. Alleging deficiency in service, the complainant has filed the present complaint seeking directions to the opposite parties to immediately cancel the said policy and to refund the amount of Rs.50000/;- alongwith interest. He also demanded compensation of Rs.50000/-.
On notice, opposite parties appeared and filed written version in which it was submitted that the complainant is making false and baseless stories to make out his case and to take the undue advantage of this Forum. The entire policy details were duly despatched at the complainant's address and all the details were clearly and explicitly mentioned on it. The complainant was also provided free look period of 15 days but the complainant never raised any query in regard to the said policy. It is after a period of more than 1 year that the complainant is alleging mis-selling which is completely wrong and baseless. It is further submitted that the said policy was for a term of 15 years and as per the terms and conditions of the policy, the policy holder has to pay the premium for a minimum period of 3 years. While denying and controverting other allegations, the opposite parties have prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.
-3-
Complainant tendered his duly sworn affidavit ex.C-1, copy of the letter dated 19.12.2012 ex.C-2.
Opposite parties tendered affidavit of Sh.Parshant Saini, Senior Manager ex.OP1,2/1, copy of letter dated 19.12.2012 ex.OP1,2/2, copy of proposal form ex.OP1,2/3, copy of renewal premium payment notice ex.OP1,2/4, copy of policy lapse notice ex.OP1,2/5.
We have carefully gone through the pleadings of the parties, arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and have appreciated the evidence produced on record by both the parties with the valuable assistance
of the ld.counsel for both the parties.
From the record i.e.pleadings of the parties and the evidence produced on record by both the parties, it is clear that the complainant obtained insurance policy from the opposite parties on 14.12.2012 by making payment of premium of Rs.50000/- through cheque vide application/proposal form No.1200193174. Complainant alleges that agent of the opposite party No.2 namely Maninderjit Singh told the complainant that he can withdraw the money after one year. So, after one year i.e.in December 2013, the complainant approached the officials of the opposite party No.2 for encashment of his policy alongwith documents which he had received by post but the officials of the opposite party No.2 refused to encash the policy and told the complainant that policy is regular premium policy with 10 years premium payment term. Complainant alleges that this fact was never told to the complainant. So, all this amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Therefore, his amount may kindly be got refunded from the opposite parties.
Whereas case of the opposite parties is that complainant in order to obtain policy from the opposite parties filled in and signed the
-4-
proposal form ex.OP1,2/3 in which it has been categorically mentioned that the term of the policy is 15 years, premium payment terms is 10 years, amount of premium is Rs.50000/- and sum assured is Rs.5,22,500/- and premium frequency is yearly. Not only this, the complainant also signed the declaration form that he has heard and understood all the terms and conditions of the policy. Not only this, certificate was also given by the agent Sh.Maninderjit Singh of the opposite parties that all the contents of the policy have been fully explained to the complainant and the complainant has signed the proposal form and declaration form after admitting the contents of the same as correct. On the basis of aforesaid proposal form, opposite parties issued policy documents vide welcome letter ex.OP1,2/2 dated 19.12.2012 which was duly received by the complainant but the complainant never approached the opposite parties for its cancellation within the free look period of 15 days from the date of receipt of policy documents if the complainant was not not satisfied with the terms and conditions of the policy. The complainant himself has stated that he approached the opposite parties for the refund of the amount of the premium in December 2013 when he received the policy documents in December 2012 i.e.after a lapse of a period of 1 year. Complainant did not pay the second premium which was due on 17.12.2013. Resultantly, after a lapse of a period of one year, the policy lapsed and the complainant did not make any effort to get the policy renewed. Ld.counsel for the opposite party submitted that opposite parties are justified in not accepting the request of the complainant for the cancellation of the policy. As such, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties qua the complainant.
From the entire above discussion, we have come to the conclusion that complainant in order to get insurance policy from the
-5-
opposite party filled and signed the proposal form ex.OP1,2/3 in which it has been clearly mentioned that term of the policy is 15 years, premium payment term is 10 years, premium amount is Rs.50000/- and premium payment frequency is yearly and sum assured is Rs.522500/-. The complainant has also signed the declaration attached with this proposal form. the complainant has also admitted that he has been explained and fully understood the terms and conditions of the policy. Opposite parties have also produced on record the declaration of the agent Maninderjit Singh dated 13.12.2012 attached with the proposal form to the effect that all the contents of the policy were fully explained to the complainant and he signed the proposal form after admitting its contents as correct. On the basis of the aforesaid application/proposal form, opposite parties issued the policy in question to the complainant vide welcome letter dated 19.12.2012 ex.OP1,2/2 which was duly received by the complainant as admitted by the complainant himself in his complaint in para 3. Had the complainant been not satisfied with the terms and conditions of the policy, he could have approached the opposite parties within free look period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the policy documents. All this fully proves that the complainant received the policy documents in December 2012 but the complainant himself stated in para 3 of the complainant that he approached the opposite parties for the first time in December 2013 after one year, for cancellation of the policy and refund of the premium amount. It stands fully proved that complainant did not approach the opposite parties within free look period of 15 days from the date of receipt of policy documents.
Consequently, we hold that opposite parties were justified in not accepting the request of the complainant and not refunding the premium amount. We hold that there is no merit in the present complaint
-6-
and same is hereby dismissed with no order as costs. Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the
record room,
11.3.2015 ( Bhupinder Singh )
President
( Anoop Sharma ) ( Kulwant Kaur Bajwa )
Member Member
