Haryana

Kurukshetra

CC/89/2019

Chandervati - Complainant(s)

Versus

HDFC Life - Opp.Party(s)

Rattan Singh

12 Mar 2020

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KURUKSHETRA.

Consumer Complaint No.89 of 2019

Date of Instt.:12.03.2019

Date of Decision: 12.03.2020

 

Chandervati w/o Sh.Rattan Singh resident of house No.1874/12, Gali No.6, Kalyan Nagar, District  Kurukshetra.                                                                           

                                                              …….Complainant.  

                                             Versus

 

Branch Manager, HDFC Life Sector 17, near Cygnus Hospital, Kurukshetra.

                ….…Opposite party.

 

                Complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act.

 

Before       Smt. Neelam Kashyap, President.    

                   Ms. Neelam, Member.       

                   Shri Issam Singh Sagwal, Member.                     

 

Present:  Sh.Rattan Singh Advocate for the complainant.

              Sh.Gaurav Gupta Advocate for the OP.

 ORDER

              This is a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 moved by the complainant Smt.Chandervati against Branch Manager, HDFC Life - opposite party.

2.             The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant  has purchased  a Health Policy in the Plan Known as “Pro-Growth Super-2” vide policy No.14775937 in the year 2011. The monthly installments to be paid were of Rs.20,000/-. It is averred that the complainant paid the installments as per schedule on time upto 2016 but the officials of the OP refused to take installments for the year 2017.  The complainant felt surprised and cheated by the OP. The complainant asked the  officials of the OP why the installments are not being accepted, who in turn stated that the policy has been closed but the complainant never gave his consent or request to closed the policy. The complainant made a written request to the OP  on 19.01.2018 that the status or consent or oral or written request for withdrawal  of the policy and a copy of that request or consent/status be given to her but the OP flatly refused to give any information in this regard and  returned the amount of premiums paid by the complainant i.e. Rs.1,20,000/- to the complainant on 8.02.2019 in his bank account No.82730100020809 but no benefit or interest has been released by the OP. The complainant requested the OP through oral requests and also through legal notice dated 24.01.2018  to give consent of the policy or to furnish the  record or consent for withdrawal, if any, in written to the complainant but in vain, which amounts to deficiency in services on the part of the  OP. Thus, the complainant alleging deficiency in services on the part of the OP has filed the present complaint and prayed that the OP be directed to pay interest @ 12 per cent per annum on the deposits of the complainant from the date of deposit till  actual payment alongwith compensation for the mental harassment caused to him and the litigation expenses.

3.             Upon notice, OP appeared and filed written statement disputing the claim of the complainant.  Regarding issuance of the policy and deposits of the installments by the complainant is stated to be a matter of record.  It is submitted that the terms and conditions of the policy were explained to the complainant at the time of proposing policy and the same are served to the complainant alongwith the policy schedule.  Moreover, it is clearly stated in the policy schedule “the insurance under this policy is subject to conditions, clauses, warranties, exclusions etc. attached”. The policy is contractual in nature and the claims arising therein are subject to the terms and conditions, forming part of the policy.  The complainant has accepted the policy agreeing and being fully aware of such terms and conditions  and executed the proposal form.  It is further submitted that the complainant had made request for withdrawal of policy and provided her bank details as well as other documents to deposit the premium received by OP and upon her request, the policy was withdrawn from the complainant and premium amount received by the OP from complainant was deposited as per given bank details. The claim of the complainant is not maintainable and present complaint deserves dismissal. All other allegations made  in the complaint have been denied and preliminary objections regarding  concealment of true and material facts and cause of action.

4.             The complainant in support of her case has filed her affidavit Ex.CW1/A and tendered documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-11 and closed his evidence.

5.             On the other hand, OP in support of its case has filed affidavit Ex.RW1/A and tendered documents Ex.R-1 to Ex.R-7 and closed its evidence.

6.             We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the material available on the case file.

7.             The learned counsel for the complainant has reiterated all the averments made in the complaint. It is argued that complainant  has purchased  a Health Policy in the Plan Known as “Pro-Growth Super-2” vide policy No.14775937 in the year 2011. The monthly installments to be paid were of Rs.20,000/-.  He paid the installments as per schedule on time upto 2016 but the officials of the OP refused to take installments for the year 2017 and told that his policy has been closed but the complainant never gave his consent or request to closed the policy. The complainant made a written request to the OP on 19.01.2018 that the status or consent or oral or written request for withdrawal any copy of that request or consent/status be given to her but the OP flatly refused to give any information in this regard and  returned the amount of premiums paid by the complainant i.e. Rs.1,20,000/- to the complainant on 8.02.2019 in his bank account No.82730100020809 but no benefit or interest has been released by the OP and the complainant is entitled to interest on his amount paid to the OP and as such there is deficiency in services on the part of the OP.

8.             Contrary to it, learned counsel for the OP has reiterated  the  submissions made in the written statement and argued that the   complainant had purchased the said policy in the year 2016 and the said policy was for ten years and after ten years of the policy, the complainant was entitled to benefits of the said policy. It is also argued that it was a unit linked policy. It is also argued that during the pendency of the policy, the complainant also obtained medi claim benefits as the policy holder was also entitled to such benefits. It has been argued that the complaisant stopped making payments of installments after 2016 on his own and he applied for payment of the deposited amount only on 19.01.2019 and he was paid the amount of Rs.1,20,000/- on 08.02.2019 on the next day and the complainant was not entitled to any interest or any benefits as claimed by the complainant. Thus, it is argued that there is no deficiency in services on the part of the OP and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint.

9.             After hearing the learned counsel for both the parties, it is not in dispute that the complainant purchased a policy from the OP and paid Rs.1,20,000/- in installments from the year 2011 to 2016. The complainant paid the installments upto 2016 and applied for the refund of the amount  on  19.01.2019 and she was paid the amount of  Rs.1,20,000/- on 08.02.2019. The only dispute is whether the complainant is entitled to interest on the said amount or not. As per own version of the OP, it was a unit linked policy and in such type of policies, the amount is incurred in the market and sometimes it  gains  benefit or loss. The OP has not placed any document on the file to show that in the event of withdrawal of the policy before the period of ten years, for which period  the policy was issued,  the complainant shall not be entitled to any interest on his amount. No doubt, the  OP has used the amount of Rs.1,20,000/- deposited by the complainant for business purposes and must have gained from that amount. Therefore, the complainant shall be entitled to interest on the amount  of Rs.1,20,000/- deposited by the complainant and for non payment of interest on the said amount or any admissible benefit, there is deficiency in services on the part of the OP.

10.            In view of our aforementioned findings and observations, we direct the OP to make the payment of interest @ 6 per cent on the amount of Rs.1,20,000/- to the complainant from the dates of  respective deposits till the date i.e 8.02.2019 when payment of Rs.1,20,000/- was made to the complainant. The complainant shall also be entitled to Rs.2000/- in lump sum as compensation for the mental harassment caused tohim and the litigation expenses.  The OP is further directed to make the compliance of this order within a period of thirty days from the date of preparation of certified copy of this order, failing which, the complainant will be at liberty to initiate proceedings under Section 25/27 of the Act against the OPs. Certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties concerned, forthwith, free of cost as permissible under Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record-room, after due compliance.

 

Announced in open Forum:

Dt.: 12.03.2020.                                                  (Neelam Kashyap)

                                                                                 President.

 

 

(Issam Singh Sagwal),         (Neelam)       

Member                               Member.