DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, NORTH-WEST
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI
CSC-BLOCK-C, POCKET-C, SHALIMAR BAGH, DELHI-110088.
CC No: 373/2015
D.No._______________________ Dated: ________________
IN THE MATTER OF:
Mrs. VIDHYAWATI,
W/o SH. GHANSHYAM DASS,
R/o 1683, JANTA FLATS, GTB ENCLAVE,
NAND NAGRI, DELHI-110095.… COMPLAINANT
Versus
HDFC STANDARD LIFE INS. Co. LTD.,
THROUGH ITS VICE PRESIDENT,
BRANCH OFFICE AT: HDFC SL DELHI-ROHINI,
BRANCH-301, 3rd FLOOR, PLOT No.15,
MANGALAM PLACE, SECTOR-3,
ROHINI, NEW DELHI-110085. … OPPOSITE PARTY
CORAM:SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT
SH. BARIQ AHMED, MEMBER
MS. USHA KHANNA, MEMBER
Date of Institution: 25.03.2015
Date of decision:05.11.2019
SH. M.K. GUPTA, PRESIDENT
ORDER
1. The complainant has filed the present complaint against OP under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 thereby alleging that the complainant under the allurement given by OP by way of advertisements in Newspapers purchased a Life Insurance policy vide no.14618761 with regard to which the complainant was to pay Rs.14,771/- as half yearly premium and the agent of OP Mr. Samarthya Sharma was receiving cheques in the sum of Rs.15,000/- instead of Rs.14,771/- and also he received
CC No.373/2015 Page 1 of 7
Rs.15,050/- from the complainant despite her serious protest. The complainant further alleged that the complainant approached OP at the branch office at Dilshad Garden, Delhi and apprised them about the said discrepancy but the officials of OP did not guide properly and thus the complainant paid three cheques consequently towards three half yearly installments for a total sum of Rs.45,050/-. Thereafter, on the complaint of the complainant OP referred to another agent Mr. Ashutosh who pressed and insisted the complainant to give a cheque in the sum of Rs.15,050/- which was issued by the complainant with hope that OP’s company will instruct the agents to deal properly within the terms stipulated in the booklet. The complainant further alleged that a sum of Rs.45,050/- was taken by both agents in total and the entire amount was paid through cheques and OP never instructed the complainant to give cheques in the sum required as Rs.14,771/- and all the cheques were given in time and there was no delay on the part of the complainant and OP and its said agents were paying fishy against the interest of the complainant as such the complainant did not pay any further amounts and has been verbally requesting the company to return her entire amount as in her old age the complainant is surviving on the pension of her husband which he has been receiving from his erstwhile employer. The complainant further alleged that from the conduct of OP the complainant has suffered a loss in the sum of Rs.45,050/- and the
CC No.373/2015 Page 2 of 7
said amount is lying with OP’s company since last one and a half year i.e. 25.09.2011, March-2012 and last payment made on 17.09.2012 and the entire amount is liable to be refunded to the complainant with interest. The complainant further alleged that the said policy was to be matured on 21.09.2016 and the complainant was to pay Rs.14,771/- and the agents or OP’s company right from the day one has been cheating and withdrawing excess amount from the complainant and the complainant sent notice dated 18.11.2014 through Regd. post and courier to OP and there is an act of deficiency in service on the part of OP.
2. On these allegations the complainant has filed the complaint praying for direction to OP to pay compensation in respect of the claim in entirely Rs.45,050/- being the total amount paid with regard to policy no.14618761 with interest accrued upto date and also the amount in excess claimed by OP as Rs.15,050/- which was claimed disabled the complainant to pay further amounts and has also claimed notice charges of Rs.5,500/- and compensation of Rs.20,000/- for causing mental, physical pain, agony and harassment.
3. OP has been contesting the case and filed reply and submitted that the complaint is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed and there is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OP. OP further submitted that last premium was paid by the complainant on 17.09.2012 and the present complaint has been
CC No.373/2015 Page 3 of 7
filed in March-2015 and as such the complaint is time barred under the Provisions of Section 24 A of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. OP further submitted that as per letter dated 25.09.2011 which was delivered to the complainant on 29.09.2011 the complainant had the option of returning the policy to OP stating reasons within 30 days from the date of receipt of the policy which shows that the complainant was satisfied with the terms & conditions of the policy. OP further submitted that in the policy it was clearly mentioned that the premium amount is Rs.14,771/- but the taxes like service tax will be payable extra at the prevailing rates which comes to Rs.15,000/- and the amount was rightly charged and as such there is no cause of action in favour of the complainant and allegation of cheating on the part of OP is baseless.
4. The complainant filed rejoinder to the reply of the OP and denied the contention of the OP.
5. In order to prove her case, the complainant filed her affidavit in evidence and also filed written arguments. The complainant placed on record copy of first premium receipt dated 25.09.2011 of Rs.15,000/-, copy of schedule of benefits issued by OP, copy of letter dated 25.09.2011 sent by OP to the complainant alongwith policy and copy of legal notice dated 18.11.2014 sent by the complainant through her Counsel to OP by Regd. A.D./Courier alongwith copy of Courier receipt.
CC No.373/2015 Page 4 of 7
6. On the other hand on behalf of OP Sh. Akash Singh, Associate Manager-Legal filed his affidavit which is on the basis of the reply of OP. OP has also filed written arguments.
7. This forum has considered the case of the complainant in the light of evidence of both the parties and documents placed on record by the complainant. The case of the complainant has remained consistent and there is nothing on record to disbelieve the case of the complainant. OP has not disputed the payment of first premium of Rs.15,000/- by the complainant. In his affidavit the witness of OP has also stated that the complainant paid a total sum of Rs.45,050/- towards 3 half-yearly premium from 25.09.2011, March-2012 and 17.09.2012. The witness of OP further stated that in view of non-payment of further premium by the complainant, the policy has been lapsed for which the complainant has to blame herself and OP cannot be held responsible for the same. The witness of OP further stated that the legal notice dated 18.11.2014 send by the complainant through her Counsel is mis-conceived and untenable and was not replied by OP.
8. We have considered the defences taken by OP. As regards 1st defence of OP that the present is time barred is concerned, the complainant has sent a legal notice dated 18.11.2014 to OP seeking refund of the amount paid to OP and OP has not disputed the sending of legal notice by the complainant. Thus, the cause of
CC No.373/2015 Page 5 of 7
action is continued and it cannot be said that the complainant has kept silent.
9. As regards the 2nd defence of OP, it is not disputed by the complainant that the policy bond was not delivered to her. Though, amount of Rs.14,771/- was to be paid towards premium but the document of the policy clearly shows that any taxes like service tax will be payable extra at the prevailing rates, in addition to the premium stated in the schedule of benefits. Thus, it cannot be said that the agents OP have wrongly and illegally charged Rs.15,000/-, Rs.15,000/- and Rs.15,050/- totaling Rs.45,050/- for the 3 half-yearly premiums. Thus, it cannot be said that there is deficiency in service on the part of OP.
10. As regards the prayer of the complainant for refund of the amount of Rs.45,050/- undisputedly paid by the complainant to OP is concerned we find no force in the arguments of OP. Though, OP has taken the stand that the policy was lapsed on account of non-payment of further premium by the complainant but it is not the case of OP that the said amount was forfeited. Moreover, OP has not placed on record any document to show that any notice was issued by OP to the complainant thereby forfeiting said amount. Accordingly, failure on the part of OP to refund the amount of Rs.45,050/- to the complainant amounts to deficiency in service.Accordingly, we hold OP guilty of deficiency in service.
CC No.373/2015 Page 6 of 7
11. Accordingly, OP is directed as under:
i) To refund to the complainant an amount of Rs.45,050/- which was deposited by the complainant towards the premiums of the policy alongwith interest @ 6% per annuum from the date of the deposit till date.
ii) To pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.10,000/- as compensation towards mentalagony and harassment caused to the complainantwhich includes cost of litigation.
12. The above amount shall be paid by OP to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receiving of this order failing which OP shall be liable to pay interest on the entire awarded amount @ 10% per annum from the date of receiving of this order till the date of payment. If OP fails to comply with the order within 30 days from the date of receiving of this order, the complainant may approach this Forum u/s 25 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
13. Let a copy of this order be sent to each party free of cost as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.
Announced on this 5thday of November, 2019.
BARIQ AHMED USHA KHANNA M.K. GUPTA
(MEMBER) (MEMBER) (PRESIDENT)
CC No.373/2015 Page 7 of 7
