The present complaint has been filed by Ms. Jaspreet Kaur (the titled complainant) against the titled opposite parties being aggrieved at their arbitrary rejection of her request for Policy-Cancellation within the 15 day Free Look-in Period and has prayed therein for directives to the OP Company for cancellation of her policy and payment of its proceeds of Rs.40,000/- with interest @ 8% PA from the date of investment till paid besides compensation @ Rs.50,000/- and cost of litigation @ Rs.15,000/- all in the interest of justice.
2. Ms. Jaspreet Kaur complainant did invest Rs.40,001/- (Receipt Ex.A1) with the OP Company in its Roz Sanchay Policy (Plan) No. 00586118 and was also apprised, at that point of time, of her right to Policy-Cancellation during the 15 day Free Look-in Period. It was also clarified to her that the said 15 Day Free Look-in Period starts upon/is counted from the day of receipt of the Policy by the Investor.
3. On 29.03.2018, the complainant received SMS (Ex.A2) on her cell that Policy # 00586118 (Application # AF004639902) stood issued. Again she received another SMS on 02.04.2018 confirming dispatch of her policy through India-Post.
4. The complainant was further advised through SMS on 04.04.2018 (Ex.A3) to wait for another 1-2 days so as to receive her policy at her recorded address. Again, on 12.04.2018 another SMS (last one in series) was received advising her 'dispatch' of her policy of 29.03.2018 and also of 'receipt' of proposed 'welcome' call, shortly. However, on 05.05.2018 (Ex.A4) the OP did advise the complainant of the successful registration of her auto-debit request for policy-premium on the 1st of every month. In the meantime, the complainant had received her policy on 18th of April' 2018 as that was wrongly delivered on 13.04.2018 by post-man to her name-sake neighbor. Somehow, the complainant landed into an emergent need of funds to the tune of a single lac of rupees and thus she applied for cancellation of her policy on 25.04.2018 i.e., on the 12th day of the 15 day Free Look-in Period counted w e from 13.04.2018 the date of wrong/inadvertent delivery at her name-sake neighbor although she, in fact, had actually been in receipt of the policy on 18.04.2018. The OP2 Br. Manager Lakhanpal Singh did himself receive the policy cancellation request after having duly verified its contents for correctness and admissibility etc. After a few days, the Sr. Branch Manager Rajinder Seth called the complainant to verify her cancellation but the requested proceeds did not follow. Upon query from the Branch, over telephone the Manager Lakhanpal Singh advised of the rejection/ decline of her cancellation request since the same was filed after the prescribed period of 15 days from the date of dispatch i.e., 04.04.2018. Responding to the inadvertent and unfair rejection of her cancellation-request, the complainant explained, in detail, the correct date of advent of the Look-in Period through her letter (Ex.A5) that was duly replied (Ex.A6) by the OP Co., with however no change of stand in their illegal endeavor to engulf her investment. Lastly, the complainant along with the above exhibited documents (Ex.A1 to Ex.A6) has also filed her self-attested affidavit/ deposition to affirm the contents of the present complaint and seeking refund of her policy-cancellation proceeds amounting to Rs.40,000/- along with interest @ 8% from the date of her investment besides Rs.50,000/- as compensation and Rs.15,000/- as litigation cost.
5. Upon notice/ summoning by the commission, the opposite parties appeared through their common counsel and filed their written statement comprised of the preliminary as well other (on-merit) objections that are summarized hereunder so as to retain the original fidelity to the extent possible (feasible) as:
6. The OP have duly authorized Parmal Singh to represent them before the commission vide the duly executed power of attorney (Ex.OP1). The OP Company addressing the present complaint as false, malicious, incorrect and malafide; nothing but an abuse of process of law and a waste of precious court-time and an attempt to avail of undue advantage has been neither maintainable in law nor on facts and thus liable to dismissal, in liminie. The complaint has no cause of action to its credit as there's no negligence/ deficiency in service on the OP 's part. Copies of application and Policy Contract (Ex.OP2) stand referred to in the reply and are exhibited here. Further, the complainant's request has not been eligible for an amicable resolve in terms of the IRDA Regulations as neither any objection nor the cancellation-request was received within the Free Look-in Period, details of which stood reproduced over the herein reply. Further, pleaded that the complainant has also been bound by the terms of the insurance contract and presently she is estopped from challenging the same at such a belated stage. She has also signed, accepted and acknowledged the declaration accompanying the proposal form and presently she cannot legally wriggle-out/ back-out of the terms as duly accepted with free consent. Moreover, if there's any delinquency in delivery it's that of India Post Department as the policy was dispatched on 06.04.2018; postal receipts/delivery schedule as Ex.OP3. So, the policy was dispatched on 02.04.2018 and delivered on 06.04.2018 and thus the free look-in period was up to 21.04.2018 whereas the cancellation-request was received at the OP office on 25.04.2018. The Cancellation-Request and another related letter along with the OP Replies are placed forth here as (Ex.OP4). Lastly, the OP denying all other contents of the complaint has sought its dismissal with costs.
7. We have carefully examined the documents/evidence produced on record (along with the scale and scope of ‘adverse inference’ for those ignored to be produced) in order to determine the respective ‘claims’ as pleaded forth by the opposing litigants in the light of the arguments as advanced by their respective learned counsels representing the two respective sides.
8. We find the prime point of contention between the two parties has been that of an issue of 'fact' and there's no conflict of law on any of the issues comprised in the subject-matter, in question. And the point of fact is also confined to a single point resolve/ determination pertaining to the impugned 'date of delivery to/ receipt by' the complainant insured as dispatched by the OP insurers.
9. Here, on the point of 'date of receipt of policy' the insured complainant has deposed that she did receive the policy on 13.04.2018 and that too by proxy i.e., by her name-sake neighbor to whom the 'postman' had inadvertently delivered the registered-cover and she in-turn had delivered it to the complainant on 18.04.2018. However, the complainant has herself ratified the inadvertent delivery and has accepted 'date of delivery' as 13.04.2018 and end-date of 15 day look-in period as: 28.04.2018 so her cancellation-request made on 21.04.2018 and received by the OP2 insurer on 25.04.2018 has been in right-order there's been no violation of any terms, rules-regulations, guidelines etc., of whatsoever be.
10. However, the OP insurers do insist, as already stated in their written reply, having dispatched the 'policy' on 02.04.2018 through registered-cover 'India-Post' and delivered by them on 06.04.2018 and thus the 15-day look-in period having ended-up on 21.04.2018 whereas they had received the cancellation-request on 25.04.2018 and as such they were duly entitled to reject the same. As the o-n-p (onus of proof) lay heavily upon the OP Co., they produced forth (Ex.OP3) the online-track-record-statement of the postal consignment containing the policy, in question, that clearly shows but implied-dispatch vide receipt of the same at the point of dispatch (Gurgaon PO) on 02.04.2018 for Batala destination via Amritsar/Ambala etc so as to finally reach/get delivered on 06.04.2018 at Batala H.O. Post Office on 06.04.2018 and not the complainant (insured) Ms. Jaspreet Kaur.
11. We find it expedient as well as pertinent here to resolve, in finality, (in order to remove all ambiguity once for all) that the 15-day look-in period shall be extendable till the policy, in question, finally reaches the addressee and cancellation-request shall be deemed to be in receipt for furtherance on the date it reaches/gets delivered at the insurers' office.
12. We observe that the OP insurers have successfully proved the delivery of the 'policy' to the Batala Post Office H.O., on 06.04.2018 for further delivery to the addressee insured/ complainant and that was somehow abandoned/ not-attempted by the OP for undisclosed reasons. Thus we resolve that date of delivery of the policy has been 13.04.2018 and as such the request for policy-cancellation (on 21.04.2018) reaching the OP on 25.04.2018 has been very much within the 15-day look-in period ending on 28.04.2018.
13. In the light of the all above, we find that the OP insurers have violated the statutory consumer rights of the complainant causing her humiliation, physical harassment, mental agony and financial loss and thus hold them liable to an adverse order under the Act, the applicable statute. Thus, we order the OP Insurers to refund the receipted amount of the policy Rs.40,000/- along with interest @ 6% P A with effect from date of investment till realization in full besides a lump sum amount of Rs.10,000/- as compensation and cost of litigation within 45 days of receipt of the certified copy of these orders otherwise the aggregate amount shall attract an additional interest @ 3% PA with effect from the date of filing of the present complaint.
14. The complaint could not be decided within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of Court Cases, vacancies in the office and due to pandemic of Covid-19.
15. Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned to record.
(Naveen Puri)
President.
ANNOUNCED: (B.S.Matharu)
JULY 07, 2022. Member.
YP.
