Punjab

Fatehgarh Sahib

EA/1/2015

Kulwant Kaur - Complainant(s)

Versus

HDFC Bank - Opp.Party(s)

Sh HS Bhutta

23 Sep 2015

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FATEHGARH SAHIB.

                                Execution Application No.01 of 2015                                              

                               In                        

           Consumer Complaint No.92 of 2013

                                                             Date of institution : 07.01.2015            

                                                              Date of decision    : 23.09.2015

 

Kulwant Kaur aged about 48 years wife of Bhupinder Singh resident of village Dadiana, Tehsil Bassi Pathanan, District Fatehgarh Sahib.

….Applicant/complainant

Versus

H.D.F.C. Standard Life Insurance Company Ltd. Registered office Raman House, H T Parekh Marg, 169 Backbay Reclamation,Mumbai 400020 through its M.D./Chairman.

…..Respondent/Opposite party No.2

Execution Application under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Quorum

Sh. Ajit Pal Singh Rajput, President     

Sh. Amar Bhushan Aggarwal, Member                                                               

Present:  Sh. H.S.Bhutta, Adv.Cl. for the applicant.          

             Sh.R.K. Dhiman, Adv.Cl. for the respondent.

ORDER

By Sh. Ajit Pal Singh Rajput, President.

                    The ld. counsel for the applicant/complainant has submitted that this is the second execution application, the complainant/applicant had supplied the surrender form alongwith the policy documents to the OP No.2 on 12.09.2014 and the same was duly acknowledged, as it is clear from the annexure A-3 and A-4. The ld. counsel argued that there is total delay of seven months for making the payment of surrender value and relied on the case law, titled as M/s SMR Parcel Service Vs. M/s PLC Lakshmanan and Brothers & Anr. III(2002)CPJ 128, wherein it has been observed in Para No.23 that, “Taking into account the overall circumstances of the case as indicated above, we are of the view that there is a belated compliance of the order by a few days namely, 9 days. Such a belated compliance rather occurred, we feel, as a consequence of the obsession, the third opposite party had, in his mind as respects the reckoning of the period of two months time as granted by the High Court of judicature as indicated earlier. Taking this aspect into consideration, we are of the view that it would not be besides justice to impose a sentence of fine of Rs.100/- on the revision petitioner/ third opposite party. We accordingly do so by setting aside the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for one year as imposed upon him by the Forum below. To put it more clearly, the sentence of Rigorous imprisonment for one year imposed on third opposite party by the Forum below is set aside and instead he is sentenced to pay a fine Rs.100/-.”

2.                On the other hand, the ld. counsel for the respondent/OP has submitted that all the payments were made to the complainant and the order of this Forum was complied. He stated that the delay in payment towards surrender value was not intentional and was procedural delay. The ld. counsel further stated that the case law cited by the ld. counsel for the applicant is not applicable to the present execution, hence prayed for the dismissal of the same.

3.                We have heard the submissions made by the ld. counsel for the parties and have also gone through the execution application alongwith the reply and documents annexed by the parties. It is evident from the Annexure A3 that letter for submitting of surrender form alongwith relevant documents was received by the OPs branch at Khanna and the same was also acknowledged on 12.09.2014 i.e Annexure A4. Thereafter the complainant waited for about 4 months and filed second execution application for payment of surrender value and the same was also paid after 4 months. In our opinion there is unexplained delay on the part of the OPs. Accordingly in view of the aforesaid discussion and the case law cited titled as M/s SMR Parcel Service Vs. M/s PLC Lakshmanan and Brothers & Anr. III(2002)CPJ 128(Supra), we find that the OPs had negligently handled the matter and thereby delayed the payment of surrender value. Hence in view of the aforementioned judgment we direct the OP No.2 to pay Rs.5000/- for delay of about 8 months. The aforesaid cost be paid within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

4.           The arguments on the execution application were heard on 10.09.2015 and the order was reserved. Now the order be communicated to the parties. Copy of the order be sent to the parties free of cost and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.

 Pronounced                                                                                                     Dated: 23.09.2015

(A.P.S.Rajput)          

  President

 

(A.B.Aggarwal)      

  Member