Punjab

Moga

CC/16/143

Chamkaur Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co. Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

In person

11 Jan 2017

ORDER

THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MOGA.

 

 

                                                                                      CC No. 143 of 2016

                                                                                      Instituted on: 29.08.2016

                                                                                      Decided on: 11.01.2017

 

Chamkaur Singh, aged about 58 years, son of S. Ranjit Singh, resident of Moga Road, near Shiv Mandir, Bagha Purana, District Moga. (M.9780003025).

 

                                                                                ……… Complainant

 

Versus

1.       HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company Limited, Communication Address: 11^th Floor Lodha Excelus Apollo is compound, N.M. Joshi Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai- 400011.

 

2.       HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company Limited, branch office, Moga Road, Bagha Purana, District Moga, through its Branch Manager.  

 

                                                                           ……….. Opposite Parties

 

 

Complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

 

Quorum:    Sh. Ajit Aggarwal,  President

                   Smt. Vinod Bala, Member

                   Smt. Bhupinder Kaur, Member

 

Present:       Sh. Chamkaur Singh, complainant in person.

                   Sh. Vishal Jain, Advocate Cl. for opposite party nos.1 & 2.

 

 

 

ORDER :

(Per Ajit Aggarwal,  President)

 

1.                Complainant has filed the instant complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") against HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company Limited, Communication Address: 11^th Floor Lodha Excelus Apollo is compound, N.M. Joshi Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai and others (hereinafter referred to as the opposite parties) directing them to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- in respect of policy relating to application no.1100000078022 alongwith interest @ 12% per annum from the date of payment till its realization. Further opposite parties may be directed to pay Rs.15,000/- as compensation for causing mental tension, harassment and agony to the complainant and to grant any other relief which this Forum deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

2.                Briefly stated the facts of the case are that agent of the opposite parties approached to the complainant and insisted the complainant to purchase the policy 'HDFC Life Progrowth Plus'. The complainant has been misguided and thus, the complainant has purchased the said policy. The payment of Rs.25,000/- was made to opposite party no.2 vide DD no.462 dated 01.05.2015. The complainant was assured that the said policy will be issued to him within a short period. But, however, the complainant has not received the policy so far inspite of various requests and reminders. However a letter dt. 12.05.2015 was received by the complainant on behalf of opposite party no.2 that the complainant will receive the policy within a short period, but with no effect. The complainant does not want to continues the said policy further more and requested the opposite parties to return the amount of Rs.25,000/- received by them within interest but they are delaying the matter on one pretext or other. There is no any ground or reason for not making payment to complainant. The complainant approached the opposite parties and to get the amount in question, but with no effect. Due to the aforesaid illegal and unwarranted acts of the opposite parties, the complainant has suffered huge mental tension and agony. Hence this complaint.

3.                Upon notice, opposite parties appeared through counsel and filed separate written reply taking certain preliminary objections that the intricate questions of law and facts are involved in the present complaint, which require voluminous documents and evidence for determination, which is not possible in the summary procedure under C.P. Act and appropriate remedy, if any, lies only in the Civil Court; that the complainant has concealed material facts and documents from this Forum as well as the opposite parties, therefore, the complainant is not entitled to any relief. The complainant has concealed the fact that the complainant purchased HDFC Life Progrowth Plus Policy no.17627354 of his own free will, voluntarily after understanding various terms and conditions thereof and never opted for seeking cancellation of policy within free look period of 15 days of receipt of policy which was sent to the complainant through post vide receipt no.EM650715960IN on dated 6.6.2015 and the same was received by the complainant on 13.06.2015. Therefore, the complainant is estopped from raising any objections at this stage. It is settled law that the terms and conditions of the policy are binding between the parties being a contract; that the complainant is not consumer of answering opposite parties; that the complainant has no locus standi or cause of action to file the present complaint against answering opposite parties. On merits, it is stated to be wrong that any agent of opposite parties approached the complainant or insisted the complainant to purchase the policy or the complainant was misguided as alleged. Rather the complainant purchased the policy of his own accord free will by filing the electoral proposal form after understanding the terms and conditions of the policy and after verifying and admitting the contents of the policy and singed the addendum thereto. The complainant is an educated person, in service and signed the documents in English. Further the policy with terms and conditions was sent to the complainant vide postal receipt no.EM 650715960 IN on dated 6.6.2015 and the same was received by the complainant on 13.06.2015. All other allegations made in the complaint have been denied and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint with costs has been made.

4.                In order to prove the case, complainant tendered in evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex. C-1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-4 and closed the evidence. 

5.                On the other hand, opposite parties tendered in evidence duly sworn affidavit of Sh.Amit Khanna, Deputy Manager, HDFC Standard Life Ins. Co. Chandigarh Ex.OP-1, 2/1 and copies of documents Ex.OP-1, 2/2 to Ex.OP-1, 2/6 and closed the evidence.

6.                We have heard the ld. Counsel for the parties and have very carefully gone through record placed on file.

7.                Ld. counsel for complainant argued that agent of the opposite parties approached to the complainant and insisted the complainant to purchase the policy 'HDFC Life Progrowth Plus'. On the allurement of agent of opposite parties, the complainant has purchased the said policy and payment of Rs.25,000/- was made to opposite party no.2 vide DD no.462 dated 01.05.2015. The complainant was told that the said policy will be issued to him within a short period. However the complainant has not received the policy. The complainant made various requests and reminders to opposite parties to issue policy to him. Thereafter, vide letter dt. 12.05.2015 opposite parties again assured the complainant that he will receive the policy within a short period, but nothing was received. The complainant requested the opposite parties to return the amount of Rs.25,000/- received by them with interest, but to no effect. Now, the complainant does not want to continue said policy and prayed that directions may kindly be issued to opposite parties to refund the amount deposited by him.

8.                On the other hand, ld. counsel for opposite parties argued that the complainant has concealed material facts and documents from this Forum as well as the opposite parties, therefore, the complainant is not entitled to any relief. The complainant purchased HDFC Life Progrowth Plus Policy of his own free will, after understanding various terms and conditions thereof and never opted for seeking cancellation of policy within free look period of 15 days of receipt of policy which was sent to the complainant through post on dated 6.6.2015 and the same was received by the complainant on 13.06.2015. As such, there is no deficiency in service on their part and the present complaint may be dismissed.

9.                Now, it is admitted case of the complainant that he purchased the insurance policy namely HDFC Life Progrowth Plus from opposite parties and paid Rs.25,000/- as premium, copy of the insurance policy is Ex.C-2. The case of the complainant is that despite several requests and reminders, the opposite parties failed to issue the policy, as such, he does not want to continue the said policy. On the other hand opposite parties argued that the complainant purchased the policy in question after understanding all the terms and conditions of the policy and he never opted for cancellation of policy within free look period of 15 days of receipt of policy, which he received on 13.06.2015. As such, the complainant is not entitled to any relief and there is no deficiency in service and trade mal practice on their part. The main grievance of the complainant is that at the time of purchase of policy in question, he was misguided by the agent of opposite parties, but he did not disclose that how and about which fact, he was misguided by the agent at the time of purchase of policy. The second grievance of the complainant is that till today, he has not received the policy documents from the opposite parties. On the other hand, opposite parties contended that they issued the policy in question on 02.06.2015 and the same was sent through postal department at the address of complainant on 06.06.2015, which was duly received by the complainant on 13.06.2015. To prove this fact, they produced tracking record regarding delivery of policy in question of postal department as Ex.OP-1, 2/6, from which, it is clear that the policy documents were delivered to complainant on 13.06.2015. Moreover, the complainant himself produced the policy documents in his evidence as Ex.C-2, which were issued on 02.06.2015, from it, the grievance of complainant that he has not received the policy in question has no force. Moreover, if it is presumed that the policy documents were not received by the complainant within time, then in that case also there is no ground for the cancellation of the policy. As per policy documents, if the complainant is not agreed with the terms and conditions of the policy, he can opt for cancellation of the policy within free look in period of 15 days, but the complainant did not avail this option within free look in period. Now, by only saying that he does not want to continue the policy in question, the complainant cannot claim the amount of premium from opposite parties.

10.              From the above discussion, we found no merit in the present complaint and the same is hereby dismissed. Parties are left to bear their own costs. Copy of this order be supplied to the parties, free of costs. File be consigned to record room. 

Announced in Open Forum.

Dated: 11.01.2017.

 

                               (Bhupinder Kaur)                 (Vinod Bala)         (Ajit Aggarwal)

                                            Member                          Member                President