1. The brief fact of the case of complainant is that he availed one cash credit loan with limit of Rs. 3,00,000/- on 21.07.2005 vide C.C Loan A/c No. 11384558251 and deposited his LIC insurance policy bearing no. 571045419 having S.A. of Rs. 40,000/- with the O.P. No. 1.  It is submitted that on 28.02.2013 he closed his above account with O.P. No. 1 on OTS basis and as on 119.09.2014 the balance was zero (o) and thereafter he never made any transaction in the said account, whereas he has not received the NOC against the alleged loan account.  It is alleged that at the time of maturity of the said insurance policy bond, he asked the O.P.No.1 to return his deposited insurance policy, but to no result.Thus he contacted with the O.P. No. 2, who in the month of January, 2021 demanded Rs. 10,000/- to get an indemnity bond from the O.P. No.1 for release of his maturity.It is further alleged that on 01.02.2021 he made a written complaint to the O.P. No. 1 to return his insurance policy bond, but on 02.02.2021 the O.P. No.1 issued a notice demanding an outstanding amount of Rs. 1,56,124/-, whereas he has closed his account on OTS basis and also O.P.No.1 replied that the during shifting of their branch the insurance bond was lost.Thus with other allegations, he filed this case claiming for waiving of illegal outstanding, issue of NOC against the alleged loan and return of the LIC policy bond from the O.P. No. 1, Rs. 15,000/- from O.P. No.2 for illegal demand, and to pay Rs. 2,00,000/- and Rs. 20,000/- from the O.Ps towards compensation and costs of litigation.

2. O.P. No. 1 appeared through Ld. Counsel who filed their counter version admitting the sanction of C.C. loan bearing A/c no. 11384558251 to limit of Rs. 3,00,000/- to the complainant and complainant has assigned / mortgaged his life insurance policy bond bearing no. 571045419 against the alleged loan, but denied the other allegations citing the guidelines of RBI have contended that the alleged loan account became NPA (Non Performing Assest) as on 11.05.2011 and interest was not charged thereafter on the principal amount and the same was maintained manually and on 30.04.2014 the complainant paid an amount of Rs. 2,52,289/- against the principal amount on OTS and the interest part was remain unpaid and the same was intimated to the complainant at the time of deposit of Rs. 2,52,289/- and also informed about the outstanding interest to the complainant.  It is also contended that as per written complaint dated 01.02.2021 of complainant for demanding of his insurance policy bond, they issued the notice dated 02.02.2021 to the complainant demanding Rs. 1,56,124/- towards unpaid interest and with other contentions, showing their no liability and deficiency in service they prayed for dismiss.

3. On the other hand, the O.P. No. 2 appeared through their Ld. Counsel who filed their written version admitting the issuance of alleged insurance policy bond infavour of the complainant and also admitted that the alleged policy bond was assigned to the O.P. No. 1 who acquires the right, title and interest over the alleged policy.
    
4. bond, which is also recorded in their policy master via computer.   Further contended that the alleged policy was lapsed for non payment of premium since 11/2010 and the paid up value of Rs. 37,760/- will be paid to the complainant on receipt of the said policy bond in original alongwith other relevant documents and the said fact was also intimated to the complainant on 30.11.2013 as well as to the O.P. No. 1 on 01.03.2016 and with other contentions, showing their no liability and deficiency in service they prayed to dismiss the case.

5. Parties have filed their respective documents in support of their submissions.  During hearing, the complainant and /or his A/R is absent on repeated calls inspite of ample opportunities given to them.  As such we heard only from the A/R for respective O.Ps.  Perused the case record and material documents available therein.

6. In the instant case, it is an admitted fact that complainant availed one cash credit loan with limit of Rs. 3,00,000/- on 21.07.2005 vide C.C Loan A/c No. 11384558251 from O.P. No. 1 and assigned his LIC insurance policy bearing no. 571045419 having S.A. of Rs. 40,000/- in favour of the O.P. No. 1.  It is also an admitted fact that the at the time of maturity of the alleged insurance policy bond, complainant demanded his assigned policy bond from the O.P.No.1 on written submission whereas in reply the O.P. No. 1 issued the demand notice dated 02.02.2021 for Rs. 1,56,124/-.  Complainant as well as the O.P. No. 1 both have filed documents to that effect.
   
   During hearing, the complainant is absent on repeated calls, as such keeping in view of natural justice, we provided ample opportunities to him to submit his views, but since the complainant and / or his A/R is absent on repeated calls / adjournments, the version of O.Ps remained unchallenged and unrebutal from the side of complainant.Further the complainant has filed certain documents which were also challenged by the A/R for O.P. No. 1, whereas at the same time, the counter version and the documents filed by O.P. No. 1 are remained unchallenged.Since no contradiction brought out by complainant to the counter version and documents before us, we have no hesitation to disbelieve the version of O.P. No. 1.In this connection, we have fortified with the verdict of Hon’ble National Commission in the case between Anuj Agarwal Vrs United India Insurance Co. Ltd., wherein it is held that “There is no illegality or jurisdictional error where an order is passed on written version and document of OP unchallenged by the complainant.”

7. Considering the above discussions, we feel the complainant has not come with proper evidence to prove his submissions and we do not think that the present case is a fit case for proceeding.  As such, we dismiss the case having no merits. 

                                                                                                              ORDER

Considering the fact and circumstances of the case, the present case is dismissed against the O.Ps having no merit.  No order as to costs.  Parties to bear their own costs.

Pronounced in the open Forum on this the 30^th day August, 2022.  Issue free copies to the parties concerned.