DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II
Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016
Case No.174/2011
Shri Prabhaker Narayan Thakur
S/o late Sh. Rameshwar Prasad Thakur
R/o Aptt. No.1404, Celebrity Suites , Palam Vihar,
Gurgaon, Haryana-122017 ….Complainant
Versus
HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co. Ltd.
C4, IRCON Building, District Centre, Saket,
New Delhi-110017 ….Opposite Party
Date of Institution : 19.05.11 Date of Order : 22.09.18
Coram:
Sh. R.S. Bagri, President
Ms. Naina Bakshi, Member
Ms. Kiran Kaushal, Member
ORDER
Naina Bakshi - Member
Complaint has been filed with the following prayers:-
i. Direct the OP to tender unconditional apology in favour of the complaint.
ii. Direct the OP to pay a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- to the complainant towards mental harassment and agony caused to the complainant on account of unfair trade practice and deficiency in service.
iii. Direct the OP to cancel the policy No.12780128 and refund the premium amount of Rs.50,000/- alongwith interest @ 24% p.a. w.e.f 21.03.2009 till the date of payment.
The complainant has stated that the OP offers wide range of insurance policies to any life insurance customers be it group or individual. The main partners of the OP are HDFC Bank Ltd., Union Bank of India, Indian Bank, Bank of Baroda, Saraswat Bank and Bajaj Capital. In the month of March, 2009 the complainant was approached by his banker Bank of Baroda, with whom he is maintaining a housing loan account, to invest in any life insurance polices sold by OP. The Bank of Baroda being the business partners of the OP, needed to meet their business targets. It is submitted that despite being under financial constraint on account of repayment of schedule undertaken by him against the aforesaid loan account maintained by the Bank of Baroda, purchased an unit linked insurance policy known as “Unit Linked Star Plus II” from the OP. The complainant paid a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards premium vide cheque No.558472 dated 21.03.2009. It is submitted that on 01.04.09 the complainant received the policy bearing No.12780129 effective from 24.03.2009 from OP. However, on going through the policy and the supporting documents enclosed therewith the complainant was surprised to find that the policy issued by the OP was not the original policy i.e. “Unit Linked Star Plus II” applied but the OP had issued an altogether different though similar sounding policy under the name “HDFC Unit Linked Youngstar Champion.” On further scrutiny of the documents enclosed with the policy the complainant was shocked to find that the photocopies of the Unit Linked Proposal Form were not made from the original unit linked proposal form filled up by the complainant in his own handwriting for purchase of Unit Linked Star Plus II. Even the complainant’s signatures affixed at the requisite places on the so called photocopies of the proposal form were forged. Some of the information furnished in the said photocopies were either incorrect or incomplete and there was no mention of some of the important documents (viz. passport) submitted by the complainant alongwith the proposal form. It is submitted that during the pre sale negotiations with the sales executive of the OP. The complainant was given detailed information about the various features of the products/policies offered for sale. The complainant decided to purchase “Unit Linked Star Plus II” based upon triple benefits features offered by the OP under the said policy viz. (a) Tax savings benefits, (b) level of protection availed and opted for – upto 40 times (which was based on the complainant’s fitness level subject to medical checkup) and (c) Life & health option. Whereas, as per the information available with the complainant, the wrong policy fraudulently issued by the OP under the name of “HDFC Unit Linked Youngstar Champion” requires no medical checkup of the complainant. It is submitted that being aggrieved with the unfair trade practices adopted by the OP in selling the policy/products forcefully and deceitfully on unsuspecting customers suiting their vested interest, immediately lodged a written complaint with the Grievance Redressal Cell of the OP vide e-mail communication on 01.04.09. On 02.04.09 the complainant was telephonically contacted by the OP with a proposal to return and replace the wrong policy on the ground that the complainant did not want the said policy. On hearing the proposal/offer made by the OP the complainant made it abundantly clear to the concerned executive of OP that it was not his case that he wanted to have the wrong policy replaced. The complainant categorically conveyed it to the executives concerned that the offer to replace the wrong policy had originate from their end so as to suit their ulterior motives while completing ignoring the most important issues viz. forgery, fraud breach of trust, fabricated of documents, unfair trade practices etc. It is submitted that after a delay of 15-16 days, the complainant received an email communication dated 16.04.2009 from the Customer Service officer of the OP formally acknowledging the complaint of the complainant and conveying regret over the inconvenience caused to the complainant on account of ‘misrepresentation by the sales executive’. Once again the complainant was informed that ‘request for cancellation of the wrong policy’ had been accepted by the company and in order to process the refund, the complainant was required to submit the original policy documents. It is further submitted that the complainant not being satisfied with the reply sent by the OP sent yet another email dated 26.04.09 to the OP categorically stating that it was not a case of misrepresentation by the sales executive but that of forgery, fabrication of documents, breach of trust, deliberate and intentional sale of improper product with ulterior motive, unfair trade practice etc. It is submitted that despite follow up by the complainant with the executives/officials of the OP both in writing as well as in person, to tender unconditional apology for the illegal acts of commission and omission, the OP continued to avoid and ignore the same. Hence, the complainant has filed the present complaint for the above stated prayers.
OP has stated, that the complaint is not maintainable as the complainant has not approached this Forum with clean hands and despite giving undertaking before the Insurance Ombudsman is trying to rake up the issue only with ulterior motive and in order to extort money from the OP. The present complaint is barred by limitation as the same has not been filed within a period of two years. The complaint merits dismissal for non-joinder of necessary parties as the complainant had not made Bank of Baroda as necessary party. As the complainant never dealt with the OP directly and, thus, the allegation of forgery and fraud do not hold substance. The entire complaint of the complainant is based on fraud and forgery which is view of settled law does not come within the domain of this Forum. It is submitted that the complainant had applied for the policy from OP by filing up the proposal form for the said policy namely “Unit Linked Young Star Champion policy”, for which proposal form duly signed by the complainant was submitted with the OP. It is stated that the complainant has signed the said form after reading all the terms and conditions of the policy. On acceptance of the said proposal form by the OP the OP issued policy No.12780129 HDFC Unit Linked Young Star Champion policy to the complainant as was applied by him. As per policy details given as under:
Commencement of date 24/03/2009
Installment premium amount Rs.50,000/-
Term 15 years
Premium frequently Annual
It is submitted that the complainant in order to wriggle out from the said contract has taken up and done all such acts as are suggested in the compliant. On the request of the complainant since the complainant had an option to return the same with in 15 days from the date of purchase of the policy the OP agreed to refund the same even before the Insurance Ombudsman subject to the complainant returning the original policy, however, though the OP is sticking to its commitments. OP has prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
Complainant has filed a rejoinder to the written statement reiterating the averments made in the complaint.
Complainant has filed his own affidavit in evidence. On the other hand, affidavit of Sh. Rajiv Kumar Zonal Legal Manager has been filed in evidence on behalf of the OP.
Written arguments have been filed on behalf of the parties.
We have heard the argument on behalf of the parties and have also gone through the file very carefully.
The complainant has filed copy of the “Unit Linked Star Plus II” as Annexure C-1. The Annexure -2 is the copy of the policy “HDFC Unit Linked Youngstar Champion” issued by the OP to the complainant alongwith the proposal form. The complainant vide email dated 01.04.09 informed the OP regarding the wrong policy issued by the OP as Annexure C-3. The OP vide email dated 16th April wherein it is informed to the complainant that
“We sincerely apologize for the delay in responding to your email complaint dated 01 April-2009 with regard to the sale of aforesaid Unit Linked Youngstar Champion plan. We sincerely regret the inconvenience caused to you due to the misrepresentation by our Sale Executives. We have reported the matter with the department concerned and assure you that necessary action will be taken. We would like to inform you that we have accepted your request to cancel the aforesaid policy. In order to process the refund we would require to submit the Original Policy Document along with a copy of this email within 10 days from the receipt of this email at any of our nearest local HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company branch or You may also send the same directly to us at the below mentioned address….”
Various email exchanged between the parties. The complainant sent a letter dated 27.07.09 to the Insurance Ombudsman. The Insurance Ombudsman vide order dated 05.07.10 which we mark as Annexure-A for the purpose of identification has observed as:
- “Hon’ble Ombudsman held that the same is beyond the purview of this forum. Therefore, no relief can be given to the complainant in this regard.
- This forum is not expected to direct the company to seek written apology for the complainant. As a matter of fact, the representative of the company had already apologized for the alleged mistake committed while issuing the policy.
- No relief can be awarded as desired by the complainant in point 3 & 4.
- The complainant can have the compensation only in respect of premium that he may get on cancellation of the policy provided he surrenders the original policy documents to the insurer.
- I do not find myself inclined to accepted as desired by the complainant in point 6 of his complaint as it is not a fit case to compensate the complainant in the manner as desired by him.”
Admittedly, the complainant had applied “Unit Linked Star Plus II” from the OP and paid Rs.50,000/- towards premium on 21.03.09. On 01.04.09 the complainant received a policy bearing No. 12780129 effective from 24.03.09 from the OP in the name of “HDFC Unit Linked Youngstar Champion” instead of “Unit Linked Star Plus II” which was applied by the complainant. The complainant inform the matter to the OP regarding issuance of wrong policy vide email dated 01.04.09. The OP vide email dated 16.04.09 informed the complainant that “they sincerely apologize for the delay in responding to your email complaint dated 01 April-2009 with regard to the sale of aforesaid “Unit Linked Youngstar Champion plan”. They sincerely regret the inconvenience caused to the complainant due to the misrepresentation by our Sale Executives. They have reported the matter with the department concerned and assure you that necessary action will be taken. They informed to the complainant that they have accepted his request to cancel the aforesaid policy. In order to process the refund the complainant requires to submit the Original Policy Document along with a copy of this email within 10 days from the receipt of this email at any of our nearest local HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company branch”.
In view of the above, the main proper of the complainant is that OP be directed to tender unconditional apology in favour of the complainant.
It is clear from the email dated 16.04.09 filed by the complainant wherein the OP had already tendered apology in favour of the complainant vide email dated 16.04.2009. Hence, the prayer of the complaint is resolved.
Regarding the prayer for refunding the premium amount of Rs.50,000/- alongwith interest wherein the complainant himself written in the complaint that the OP is ready to refund the amount after submitting the original documents. Therefore, the prayer of the complainant will be resolved, if the complainant submit the original policy documents to the OP.
As per the order of the Insurance Ombudsman dated 05.07.10 the Hon’ble Insurance Ombudsman held that the complainant can have only compensation only in respect of premium that he may get on cancellation of the policy provided he surrenders the original policy documents to the insurer.
In view of the above it appears that the complainant has not submitted the original policy alongwith the documents to the OP. The complainant has stated in the complaint that his signature was forged and fabricated on the documents while issuing the wrong policy but no expert report was filed by the parties. The nature of the proceedings before this Forum are essentially summary in nature and adjudication of issue which involves dispute factual question should not be adjudicated by this Forum and the proper Forum for dealing with such questions would be a competent civil court .
In our considered opinion, the prayer sought the complainant was not denied by the OP. Therefore, the complainant fails to prove any deficiency in service on the part of the OP. We partly allow the complaint and direct the OP to refund an amount of Rs.50,000/- deposited by the complainant towards premium amount on returning the original policy alongwith documents to the OP alongwith 6% interest from the date of its deposit till realization and Rs.20,000/- towards compensation for causing mental tension and agony to the complainant while issuing wrong policy to the complainant.
This order shall be complied by the OP within a period of 30 days failing which OP shall become liable to pay Rs.50,000/- alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of its deposit till realization.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.
Announced on 22.09.18
