Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 483.
Instituted on : 05.10.2018.
Decided on : 04.10.2023.
Anju Bala age 30 years w/o Suresh Hooda R/o H.No.366/163, Rishi Nagar, Rohtak.
.....................Complainant
Vs.
- Dauphin Travel Marketing Private Limited through its Divisional Manager/G.M./Incharge, having its office at A-212C/304, Tirupati Plaza, Gali no.1, Shakarpur-110092, Delhi.
- Anil Dalal s/o Sh. Devdut R/o Gali no.6, Chootu Ram Nagar, Rohtak.
……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR. VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER.
Present: Sh.Anurag Malik, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh.Pardeep Mittal, Advocate for the opposite party No.2.
Opposite party No.1 already exparte.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case as per the complainant are that she has 2 minor daughters and one minor son of 7 years with 100% disability. Complainant wanted to purchase a life insurance policy and health policy for herself and her children. Opposite party No.2 has told the complainant that he is agent of various life insurance companies and he will provide life insurance and health insurance policies to the complainant. The opposite party No.2 assured the complainant that he will provide life insurance coverage for 2 lacs and health insurance of Rs.4 lacs against the annual premium of Rs.7000/-. The complainant agreed to purchase above said policy plan for herself and her children and paid Rs.7000/- as first installment on 13.11.2017 and no receipt was issued by the opposite party despite repeated requests of the complainant. In the first week of February 2018 opposite party no.2 told the complainant that she became a member of DTM company and receipts of payment and policy papers and membership will be delivered at complainant’s address. Complainant never agreed to be a member of opposite party no.1. She asked the opposite parties to refund the amount of Rs.7000/- but the same has not been refunded to the complainant despite her repeated requests. The act of opposite parties is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to make the payment of Rs.7000/- alongwith interest, compensation of Rs. 50000/- and to pay an amount of Rs.11,000/- as litigation expenses to the complainant.
2. Notice of the present complaint was issued to the opposite parties. Opposite party No.1 in its reply has submitted that the entire transaction took place between complainant and opposite party No.2. Opposite party no.1 has never done any life insurance policy or health insurance policy and has never involved in sale-purchase of any insurance policy, and as a matter of fact the opposite party No.1 only gets issued group personal accidental policy as a gift for one year to its customer from National Insurance Company and that too without charging any premium from its customers. It is submitted that in the present case the complainant had purchased the package on 13.11.2017 and the option to get the payment refunded was available to her within 7 days from the date of purchase of package, however the complainant has not contacted to the opposite party No.1 for refund of the amount nor corresponded with the opposite party No.1 by writing any application/letter for withdrawal/refund of the amount. It is denied that complainant has requested the opposite party no.1 number of times to refund the amount of Rs.7000/-. The complainant has alleged cheating by the opposite party no.2 and in the said transaction the opposite party no.1 has no role to play at all. Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party No.1. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied and opposite party No.1 prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs. However, opposite party No.1 was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 12.05.2023 of this Commission.
3. Opposite party No.2 in its reply has submitted that answering opposite party is an agent of opposite party No.1 which is a company registered under Ministry of Corporate Affairs. The complainant approached the answering respondent through one Rohit and Sheela who are known to complainant and answering respondent and both are distributors of opposite party No.1.. They asked the answering respondent that complainant is interested to become member of opposite party No.1 and thus they requested the answering opposite party to meet the complainant. On their request, a meeting was held between the complainant and answering respondent and the answering respondent provided information regarding various packages offered by opposite party No.1 to the complainant as per the booklet issued by the opposite party No.1. The complainant showed her keen interest to join company i.e. opposite party No.1 and agreed to purchase family package of opposite party no.1 for an amount of Rs.6950/-. On 13.11.2017 the answering opposite party gave the aforesaid package to the complainant vide ID no.5015994 and provided her one gents suit length(3 meter) coat pant, ladies suit, cosmetics products kit(4 items), presentation book and countrywide hotel vouchers(complementary) and one year accidental insurance policy worth rupees 4 lakh. The answering respondent also gave welcome letter to the complainant alongwith all the aforesaid gift items and the same were accepted by the complainant. The aforesaid package was purchased by the complainant with her sweet will. There is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party No.2. The complainant is not entitled for getting any relief as claimed in the complaint and dismissal of complaint has been sought.
4. Ld. counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C2 and has closed his evidence on dated 07.03.2022. Ld. counsel for the opposite party No. 2 has tendered affidavit Ex.RW2/A, Ex.RW2/B, documents Ex.R2/1 to Ex.R2/6 and closed his evidence on dated 16.03.2023.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
6. In the present case, in fact the amount of Rs.6950/- has been paid by the complainant to the respondent no.2 on account of purchase of membership in some scheme but the name of the scheme has not been disclosed by the complainant in the present complaint. We have minutely perused the affidavit of Sh. Anil Dalal Ex.RW2/A, as per which he has submitted that deponent is an agent of opposite party number 1 i.e. Duphin Travel Marketing Pvt. Ltd. company. Distributors of company namely Rohit and Sheela asked to the deponent that complainant is interested to become a member of opposite party No.1. He gave information regarding various packages to the complainant as per booklet issued by opposite party No.1. The complainant showed her keen interest to join company and agreed to purchase family package of OP No.1 for an amount of Rs.6950/-. On 13.12.2017 the deponent gave the package to the complainant vide ID number 5015994 and provided her one gents suit length(3 meter) coat pant, ladies suit, cosmetics products kit(4 items), presentation book and countrywide hotel vouchers(complementary) with one year accidental insurance policy worth rupees 4 lakh. The complainant was desperate to become member of opposite party no.1 and the aforesaid package was purchased by the complainant with her sweet will.
7. From the alleged affidavit it is proved that the complainant had purchased a family package of OP No.1 for an amount of Rs.6950/- and got free gifts i.e. one gents suit length(3 meter) coat pant, ladies suit, cosmetics products kit(4 items), presentation book and countrywide hotel vouchers(complementary) one year accidental insurance policy worth rupees 4 lakh. Now the complainant has filed the present complaint for getting the refund of Rs.7000/- which has been invested by him to get the membership of respondent no.1 company.
8. We have minutely perused the documents Ex.C1 and C2 i.e. welcome letter and Certificate of insurance but it has not been mentioned anywhere in these 2 documents that an amount of Rs.6950/- has been paid by the complainant on account of insurance policy. In fact as per the written statement and affidavit filed by the respondents, it has been established that the alleged amount has been paid by the complainant on account of membership scheme of opposite party No.1 with free gifts and the accident insurance policy has been provided to the complainant on account of some additional benefit of the scheme. So as per our opinion the complaint is false and fabricated. Hence there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. As such present complaint stands dismissed with no order as to costs.
9. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
04.10.2023.
................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
………………………………..
Tripti Pannu, Member.
................................................
Vijender Singh, Member
