Complainant Rakesh Kumar through the present complaint filed U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 (hereinafter, called the Act) has prayed for issuance of necessary directions to the titled opposite parties to refund Rs.3,00,000/- which they had taken from him under the garb of premiums of the policy in question alongwith 18% interest from the date of the policy till its realization. Opposite parties be further directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/- for mental pain and harassment and Rs.20,000/- for litigation expenses to him, in the interest of justice.
2. The case of the complainant in brief is that he is having a bank account bearing customer ID 29366135 in HDFC Bank Branch Batala, Punjab. On 2.1.2012 he had approached the opposite party no.1 in order to invest his money in the shape of FDRs amounting to Rs.5,00,000/-. Opposite party no.1 with malafide intention in connivance with the opposite party no.2 and 3 fixed deposited only an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- and self invested the remaining amount of Rs.1,00,000/- in the form of HDFC saving assurance policy bearing no.14829669. Opposite parties under the garb of issuing fixed deposits had obtained his signatures on various blank forms and papers. On 5.3.2012 he came to know regarding the policy in question from the office of opposite party no.3 on phone call and he was stunned to know the same as he had never authorized opposite parties for the issuance of any insurance policy. He vide letter dated 5.3.2012 also apprised the Manager of the head office of opposite party no.3 that he does not want to continue with the insurance policy in question as it is the outcome of fraud. The opposite parties further apprised him that he has to pay three years premiums amounting to Rs.99,999/- and after that he will get double the amount invested and if he does not proceed with the policy it will get lapsed and he will get nothing. He had deposited three yearly premiums amounting to Rs.99,999/- in the office of opposite party no.3. He afterwards approached the office of opposite party no.3 for getting the matured value of the policy in question and he was stunned as opposite parties failed to keep their words and told him that he will have to pay premium for ten years for the survival of the policy in question. He after depositing the premium continuously for the period of three years approached the opposite parties and requested them to withdraw the amount but the opposite parties linger on the matter with one pretext or the other. On 25.1.2016 he has approached the office of opposite party and written request was made to withdraw the amount of policy no.14829669 alongwith documents as demanded by the opposite party and the opposite party has issued receipt but till date the opposite party has not refund the amount deposited by him. A legal notice dated 1.3.2016 through his counsel was served upon the opposite parties but till date neither the opposite party has refund the amount nor any reply of the notice was sent. Hence this complaint.
3. Opposite parties No.3 appeared through its counsel and filed its written reply taking the preliminary objections that the complainant has no cause of action to file the present complaint; the complaint of the complainant is not within limitation and the complainant has not come to the Court with clean hands and as such not entitled for any discretionary relief. On merits, it was submitted that that the policy has been duly sent and no such application made within 15 days. Even three yearly premiums duly paid by the complainant which clearly falsify the allegations leveled by the complainant. All other averments made in the complaint has been vehemently denied and lastly prayed that the complaint may be dismissed with costs.
4. Complainant tendered into evidence his own affidavit Ex.C1 alongwith other documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C12 and closed the evidence.
5. Counsel for the opposite party no.1 tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh.Vinod Kumar Officer HDFC Bank Batala Ex.OP-1/1 and closed the evidence.
6. Counsel for the opposite party no. 3 tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh.Amit Khanna Authorized Signatory Ex.OP-3/1 alongwith other documents Ex.OP-3/2 to Ex.OP-3/11 and closed the evidence.
7. We have carefully examined and thoroughly considered the evidence along with its supporting documents as available on records of the proceedings in the backdrop of the arguments as put forth by the learned counsels for both the litigating sides.
8. We find although the complainant on 02.01.2012 had allegedly instructed the OP1 Bank for a Fixed Deposit of Rs.5.0 Lac only with them; he was also issued (by the OP3 Insurers) one HDFC Savings Assurance Policy with an annual premium sum of Rs One Lac only (being Rs.99,999/- to be exact) for a term period plan of 10 years. The complainant upon coming to know of the suo-moto insurance on 05.03.2012 had immediately applied for its cancellation (Ex.C2)/refund but was however persuaded to stay back with the policy for at least 3 full years to reap its full benefits. However, the OP3 insurers did not refund the policy proceeds after the ‘3’ year lock-in period and that prompted the present complaint. Further, the complainant through his duly deposed affidavit Ex.C1 supported by other exhibited documents (Ex.C2 to Ex.C12) has successfully proved the factual aspects of the accusing contents of his complaint.
9. On the other hand the OP1 Bank vide his lone affidavit has denied all responsibility of the Insurance Policy alleging to be an inter-se matter between the insured and the insurers who have somehow rebutted one and all accusations alleging the own free consent of the insured complainant. In support, affidavit Ex.OP3/1 and documents exhibited as: Ex.OP3/2 to Ex.OP3/10 have been produced; and amongst their many rebuttals had also stated their contention vide affidavit Ex.OP3/1 that the complainant being an educated awakened person has consentedly opted to invest his savings in said policy and as such cannot be presently allowed to retrace back from his willful commitments.
10. Lastly, we somehow find that the above pleadings lose their inflated authenticity in the absence of the complainant’s confirmed annual income (from all sources) with details of his necessary expenses with the related ITRs etc and that shows that no financial analysis of the complainant’s eligibility and capacity to pay the hefty premium etc has been ever worked out at the OP3 insurers’ end in the related consultant Confidential Reports which under no circumstances shall validate an annual saving of that volume measured against his moderate income. It also dilutes the evidentiary value of all other OP1 documents right from Ex.OP3/1 to Ex.OP3/10.
11. Moreover, we are of the considered opinion that it shall never be expected from a middle class shop keeper with moderate means to have made an inadvertently liberal annual investment of Rs.1.00 Lac (in one insurance policy) to let the policy lapse over tamely and that too on account of non-payment of premia. Thus, it shall be judicially deduced that the complainant had opted only for the Fixed Deposit in the Bank as one-time investment and he shall not suffer for the lapsed annually paid premium policies as that was never opted by him.
12. In the light of the all above, we find that there has indeed been an infringement of consumer rights of the present complainant at the hands of opposite party service providers and thus we partly allow the present complaint and consequently ORDER the titled opposite parties insurers to refund/repay back full premia amount of the related policy to the present complainant with Savings Bank interest @ 4 % PA from the date of respective deposits besides to pay him a lump sum amount of Rs.10,000/- as cost and compensation within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of these orders otherwise the aggregate awarded amount shall attract additional interest @ 9% PA from the date of orders till actual payment.
13. Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. After compliance, file be consigned to record.
(Naveen Puri)
President
ANNOUNCED: (Jagdeep Kaur)
June, 02 2017. Member.
*MK*
