Order dictated by:

Sh.S.S. Panesar, President.

1.       Mr.Shangara Singh, complainant has brought the instant complaint under section 12 and 13 of  the Consumer Protection Act, 1986  on the allegations that complainant had been issued a policy bearing policy No. 016823421 after paying premium amount of Rs. 5,00,000/-. The complainant is consumer as provided under the Act and is competent to invoke the jurisdiction of the Forum. The complainant was approached by the  agent of opposite party at HDFC Bank, where the complainant is maintaining the account and allured the complainant to invest  in the policies of the opposite party with the facility that in case the complainant is not satisfied with the policy of the opposite party, the complainant has the right to get the invested amount refunded within 15 days of receiving of the policy documents. The said period is called freelook period. The complainant received the copy of the policy document from HDFC Bank, where the opposite party sent the policy document in second week of June 2014 and getting the said policy document, complainant was shocked to find that the policy has been issued in wrong name and it was against the terms of single premium and the policy was issued for 5 years premium payment. The complainant refused to accept the said policy and requested the opposite party to refund the policy amount invested by the complainant. The request was made within the assured period of getting the money refunded from the opposite party. The complainant approached the opposite party on 13.9.2014 reminding for the refund of his invested amount of Rs. 5,00,000/-.  But till the filing of the present complaint, the amount has not been refunded to the complainant.  The complainant thereafter approached the opposite party several times to get his invested money back but opposite party assured the complainant to look into the matter and refund the same at the earliest. But the opposite party did not   comply the same. The aforesaid act of the opposite party in not refunding the invested amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- to the complainant amounts to deficiency in service, unfair trade practice and mal-practice and the same is not sustainable in the eyes of law. The complainant has sought for the following reliefs vide instant complaint:-

(i)      Opposite party be directed to refund the amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- alongwith interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of payment till realization.

(ii)     Opposite party be also directed to pay compensation to the tune of Rs. 50000/- alongwith litigation expenses.

Hence, this complaint.

2.       Upon notice, opposite party appeared and filed written version contesting the claim of the complainant  taking certain preliminary objections therein inter alia that the present complaint is malafide as it has been filed  by the complainant with a view to harass and pressurize the opposite party. The allegations and the contention raised by the complainant are totally false, frivolous and baseless besides being devoid of any merits. The complaint has been filed with a view to malign the credential & reputation of the replying opposite party with dishonest intention ; that the complainant is bad for misjoinder and non joinder of necessary parties and the complainant had intentionally not made HDFC Bank as party to the present complaint  which is very much necessary for deciding the present complaint. The complainant had intentionally mentioned the wrong address of the replying opposite party whereas the replying opposite party is having no such office branch in Ranjit Avenue, B-Block, Amritsar. As such, this complaint being malafide one , is liable to be dismissed ; that there is no deficiency of service on the part of replying  opposite party in any manner and the opposite party has acted in due course in a lawful manner while discharging their official duties and for that reason, opposite party cannot be held liable for any deficiency in service ; that complainant has not  come before this Forum with clean hands and as such the complaint is liable to be dismissed. The real facts are that the complainant himself approached the officials of the replying opposite party for the purpose of  investing  his money in life Insurance policy with HDFC Life Guaranteed Pension Plan for a term of 10 years with the premium paying term of 5 years of Rs. 5,00,000/- annually. The complainant had duly signed a proposal form dated 26.4.2014, illustration form etc for the purchase of policy. The proposal was accepted  on the standard rates based on the information provided by the life assured and consequently a policy was issued bearing No. 016823421 with risk commencement date as 26.4.2014. The policy bond alongwith all relevant documents were sent to the complainant but the opposite party received back all the documents as the complainant could not receive the same due to his non availability . In this respect, the replying opposite party made various intimation to the complainant by various communication and finally on 16.6.2014 , the complainant was called to receive all his policy documents. On 16.6.2014 all the documents pertaining to the policy were handed over to the complainant  after taking his signatures as a proof of delivery. It is pertinent to mention over here that the complainant had not exercised his right to get the invested amount refunded within 15 days of receiving of the policy documents. As such, the complainant is not entitled for any claim amount as alleged in the present complaint. Copy of the said delivery form has been attached. As the complainant is a literate and well qualified person, as such he understood each and everything and this fact clearly establishes that the complainant was having full knowledge about the terms and conditions of the policy and he signed all the requisite documents/forms of policy after fully understanding and admitting the contents/terms and conditions. The copy of the said illustrations is attached ; that present complaint filed by the complainant is not maintainable. It is alleged by the complainant as the insurance plan sold to him was not disclosed to him is just and a false story has been concocted by the complainant that his signatures were taken on blank proposal form. It is admitted  that complainant has paid Rs. 5,00,000/-  towards premium. Therefore, it cannot be said that complainant was not aware as to for what purpose the complainant was paying the amount of Rs. 5,00,000/-. The manager’s cheque was favored in the name of HDFC Life dated 25.4.2014. On merits facts narrated in the complaint have been specifically denied. The complaint is hit by limitation as the complainant has not exercised his volition within 15 days of the delivery of the policy documents i.e. free look period and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint with cost has been made.

3.       In his bid to prove the case Sh.Deepinder Singh,Adv.counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence affidavit of the complainant Ex.C-1, copy of letter with postal receipt dated 13.9.2014 Ex.C-2, policy schedule Ex.C-3, copy of pass book Ex.C-4 and closed the evidence on behalf of the complainant.

4.       To rebut  the aforesaid evidence Sh.Munish Kohli,Adv.counsel for the opposite party tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh.Amit Khanna,Associate Manager Legal Ex.OP1 alongwith documents Ex.OP2 to Ex.OP22 and closed the evidence on behalf of the opposite party.

5.       We have heard the ld.counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the record on the file.

6.       There is no denying the fact that complainant obtained Insurance policy, copy whereof is Ex.C-3 on payment of Rs. 5,00,000/- as premium. It is the case of the opposite party that  Insurance policy alongwith terms and conditions was supplied to the complainant on 16.6.2014 and copy of the receipt issued by the complainant in this regard accounts for Ex.OP15. It is also an admitted fact that the complainant approached the opposite party for refund of the insurance amount premium  as he was not satisfied regarding the terms and conditions of the Insurance policy in dispute. Although it is the case of the opposite party that the volition  for surrender of the policy in dispute by the complainant has not been done within the free look period yet, the fact has been declined by the complainant. As a matter of fact  the complainant immediately approached the opposite party  on receipt of the Insurance policy in dispute complaining that he has obtained the policy in dispute on the presumption that it was a single  premium policy. But after going through the terms and conditions of the policy in dispute, he came to  know that the premium amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- was to be paid for a period of 5 years onwards. Therefore, the terms and conditions of the Insurance policy in dispute were not acceptable  to him. The copy of the letter, the complainant wrote to the opposite party in this connection, accounts for Ex.OP7. Although, the request for  surrender of policy has not been made within free look period yet, there being  a mistake regarding  the name of the complainant seems to be a valid reason  for the complainant to get the policy revoked. The policy records the name of the complainant as Shangara Maish Nayyar ,whereas the actual name of the complainant happens to be Shangara Masih  Nayyar. It is the case of the complainant that he made complaint regarding the said fact to opposite party.  Copy of letter Ex.OP8 bears witness to the  said fact. But, however, no correction regarding the name of the complainant has been made by the Insurance company for the reasons best known to them.  Since the Insurance policy issued to the complainant is invalid due to mistake in the name of the policy holder, therefore, the policy  stood invalidated. Even on that account the complainant has every right & authority to get the same cancelled and receive premium amount back from the opposite party. Consequently in our considered opinion the complainant is entitled to surrender the policy in dispute to the opposite party and the opposite party shall refund the premium obtained by them under the policy as per terms and conditions of the Insurance policy in dispute after deduction of stamp charges, medical charges, if any, and the mortality charges for the period the policy remained inforce , within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of order; failing which complainant shall be entitled to interest @ 9% p.a from the date of filing of the complaint until full and final recovery. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum. Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.

Announced in Open Forum

Dated : 29.08.2016

/R/