Delhi

East Delhi

CC/832/2015

HARI PARSHAD - Complainant(s)

Versus

HDFC LIFE INS - Opp.Party(s)

09 May 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

 

C.C. NO. 832/15

 

Shri Hari Prashad Sharma

32/52, Bhikam Singh Colony

Gali No. 11, Vishwas Nagar

Shahdara, Delhi – 110 032                                              ….Complainant

 

Vs.

 

HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co. Ltd.

101/102, 1^st Floor, Aditya Complex

Karkardooma Commercial Centre

Vikas Marg, Delhi                                                               ….Opponent

 

Date of Institution: 09.11.2015

Judgment Reserved on: 09.05.2017

Judgment Passed on: 17.05.2017

CORUM:

Sh. Sukhdev Singh (President)

Dr. P.N. Tiwari  (Member)

Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

 

Order By : Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

 

 

JUDGEMENT

 

The present complaint has been filed by Shri Hari Prashad Sharma, the complainant against HDFC (Bank) Standard Life Insurance Company Limited seeking directions to the OP to refund Rs. 70,000/- alongwith compensation on account of mental agony as Rs. 30,000/- and litigation expenses.

2.       Briefly stated the facts of the present complaint are that one policy bearing no. 13753065 was purchased by Smt. Premlata, wife of the complainant, at annual premium of Rs. 50,000/-.  It is stated by the complainant that his wife was assured that the said policy will give good returns, so, his wife transferred Rs. 1,40,000/- from her FD account to saving account. 

          It is further stated that 2 premiums were paid in the year 2010 and 2011, but premium for the year 2012 could not be paid due to lack of funds.  In the month of July, 2013, Rs. 10,000/- were deposited in the saving account being maintained by the life assured, Smt. Premlata, wife of the complainant.  It is also stated that they were assured that the premium would be debited from their account.  The complainant has stated that after 5 years, a cheque for Rs. 29,975/- was issued by OP against the fund value.  The complainant requested OP to reconsider the decision, which remained unreplied.

          Complainant has annexed letter dated 20.08.2015 duly received by OP, photocopy of the passbook, death certificate of Smt. Premlata and copy of policy alongwith terms and conditions.

3.       OP filed their reply upon service of the notice of the present complaint.  They raised preliminary objections regarding the territorial jurisdiction and limitation for filing the present complaint.  They also stated that as the life assured had failed to exercise her option to withdraw during the freelook period and had defaulted in paying 3^rd and subsequent premiums, the policy had lapsed.  Thus, no deficiency in service could be attributed on the part of OP.  It was averred that the 3^rd premium was due on 29.06.2012, which remained unpaid and ultimately policy was terminated on 14.07.2014. 

          Receipt of 2 premiums and payment of Rs. 29,975/- had been admitted.  It was also stated that as the wife of the complainant had signed the proposal form, she was well aware and bound by the terms and conditions of the contract.  Rest of the contents of the complaint were denied.

4.       Rejoinder to the reply was filed by the complainant where the contents of the complaint were reiterated and that of the reply were denied.

5.       Evidence by way of affidavit was filed by both the parties.  Complainant examined himself and deposed the contents of the complaint. 

          OP examined Shri Ankush Saini, Associate Manager – Legal, who stated the contents of their reply on affidavit and got exhibited authorization letter as Ex. OP/1, proposal form and policy document as Ex.OP/2 (colly.) and Ex.OP/3 (colly.) respectively.

6.       We have heard the arguments on behalf of the complainant and Ld. Counsel for OP. 

          Firstly, deciding on the preliminary objection regarding the territorial jurisdiction, the fact that the complaint has been at the final stage.  It will result in injustice to the complainant if the arguments of  Ld. Counsel for the OP is accepted at this stage.  This argument of         Ld. Counsel for the OP cannot come in the way of imparting substantial justice, as the competence of the forum is not in question.  When the competence of this forum is not in question, the technical ground of territorial jurisdiction cannot be accepted.  Therefore, the argument of Ld. Counsel for OP that this Forum has no territorial jurisdiction cannot be accepted and the same stands rejected.

          Secondly, as far as limitation for filing the present complaint is concerned, the policy was terminated on 14.07.2014 and thereafter, the cheque for Rs. 29,975/- was sent to the complainant.  The date of institution of the present complaint is 28.10.2015, which is well within the period prescribed under Section 24A of the Consumer Protection Act as complainant is asking for refund of balance of premiums paid.  Now, coming to the merits, the complainant has stated that the 3^rd premium, which was due on 29.06.2012 could not be paid due to shortage of funds, nothing has been placed on record to prove that the complainant or life assured had tried to revive the policy as per terms and conditions.  Further, insurance is a contract between the life assured and the Insurance Company, both are bound by the terms and conditions of the contract, the complainant cannot allege deficiency in service on the part of OP.  They have acted in accordance with the terms and conditions of the policy.  The life assured has defaulted in paying premiums regularly and because of that the policy has lapsed, thus, present complaint is dismissed being devoid of merits.  There is no order as to cost.   

          Copy of the order be supplied to the parties as per rules.

File be consigned to Record Room.

 

 

(DR. P.N. TIWARI)                                              (HARPREET KAUR CHARYA)

Member                                                                                Member 

 

           

            (SUKHDEV SINGH)

                                                      President