Punjab

Nawanshahr

CC/112/2016

Asha Rani - Complainant(s)

Versus

HDFC Bank - Opp.Party(s)

P.K Sharma

02 Jan 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM SHAHEED BHAGAT SINGH NAGAR. 

 

Consumer Complaint No    :   112 of 19.12.2016 

Date of Decision              :   02.01.2017      

Asha Rani W/o Pardeep Kumar Resident of Village Aur, Tehsil Nawanshahr, District SBS Nagar.

                                                          ….Complainant

Versus

1. HDFC SL, Nawanshahr, Branch 2^nd Floor, Banga Road, Near PSEB Godown, above ICICI Bank, Nawanshahr, District SBS Nagar.
2. HDFC, Registered Office, Lodha Excelus, 13 Floor, Appolo Mills Compound, N.M. Joshi Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai.
3. Dharuv, Branch Manager, HDFC, Branch Aur, Tehsil Nawanshahr, District SBS Nagar.

Opposite parties

Complaint under the Provisions of Consumer Protection Act, 1986

QUORUM:         

S.KARNAIL SINGH, PRESIDENT

S.KANWALJEET SINGH, MEMBER

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES

For Complainant           :         Sh.P.K. Sharma, Advocate

 

ORDER 

PER S.KARNAIL SINGH, PRESIDENT

1. This complaint filed by complainant, wherein it is alleged that in the month of April 2016, complainant visited HDFC Bank, Branch Aur, where OP-3 – Branch Manager approached to complainant and represented that in case she make deposit in this bank of Rs.5 Lakhs by way of fixed deposits, then, she will get Rs.10,00,000/- after two years. First of all, investing the said amount in fixed deposits, in criminal conspiracy with Op No.1&2 got issued two insurance policy, the complainant received first policy No.18368911 in the month of April 2016 through registered post and on next day, after received the policy, she met OP-3 and she kept policy No.18368911 and told that after one month complainant will get another policy/documents of Rs.4,00,000/- and after getting another policy/documents, she again take that policy to OP-3 and complainant will get Rs.10,00,000/-.  After 25.05.2016, complainant received another policy bearing No.18457528 and one friend of son of complainant read the policy and explained to complainant, then complainant came to know that OP-3 cheated to complainant.  After that the complainant met OP-3 and asked him to return the amount to the complainant, but OP refused to return the amount.  Complainant send two requests for cancellation of the policies and return back money through registered post on 28.05.2016 within 15 days but the OPs failed to give reply of the letter/requests.  The complainant came to know about this fraud committed by OPs on 25.08.2016 when she received the insurance policy bearing No.18457528 and she utter astonishment came to know that the amount of Rs.4,99,000/- have been invested in the said insurance policy.  The OPs by investing the amount of Rs.99,000/- of the complainant, in the insurance policy without her consent and permission have infact cheated and defrauded the complainant and as such instant complaint has been filed with prayer that direction be given to OPs to refundRs.99,000/- alongwith compensation of Rs.10,000/- with costs.
2. We have heard counsel for the complainant and also scanned complaint file alongwith documents very minutely.
3. Today, this complaint put up before us for preliminary admission and after going through the factum of the complaint, we find that complainant has categorically, repeatedly, alleged that the OP has committed cheating as well as fraud with the complainant and if it is so, then this Forum has got no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint because whenever fraud is pleaded, then jurisdiction of this Forum is ousted.
4. Apart from above, it reveals from insurance policy documents wherein it is categorically mentioned that the insurance policy involves unit linked policy and whenever unit linked plan/policy is in dispute then this Forum has got no jurisdiction to entertain for the same. 
5. The jurisdiction of Consumer Forum is excluded in the cases pertaining to Unit Linked Policy.  In case of Ram Lal Aggrwala Vs Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Company and other III (2013) CPJ 203 (NC) the Hon’ble National Commission has held that the policy having being taken for investment of premium in the share market which is speculative transaction and the complainant does not come within the purview of consumer as per the Act.
6. Therefore, in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble National Commission, in the case Ram Lal Aggarwala (Supra), the present complaint is not maintainable before this Forum.  Accordingly, the present complaint is dismissed with no orders as to the costs at this preliminary stage.
7. Copies of the order be sent to the parties, as permissible, under the rules.
8. File be indexed and consigned to record. 

Dated 02.01.2017                                                         

 

 

(Kanwaljeet Singh)                (Karnail Singh)

Member                                  President