DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA.

CC.No. 139 of 26-3-2012

Decided on 29-08-2012

Sukhvir Kaur Sidhu, aged about 48 years, wife of Sukhcharan Singh Sidhu S/o Gajja Singh, resident of 23 Midsumer Dr.Bhrahampton, Ontario, Canada through Sepcial Power of Attorney Sh.Karamjit Singh S/o Jiwan Singh S/o Pritam Singh, Resident of H.No.22226, Gali No.12, Dhobiana Road, Bathinda.

........Complainant

Versus

1. ICICI Bank Ltd., Bibi Wala Road, Near 100 ft. Chowk, Bathinda through its Branch Manager.

2. ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Co.Ltd., Mall Road, Opp.Dr.Mohal Lal Garg, Bathinda through its Branch Head.

.......Opposite parties

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

QUORUM

Smt. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President.

Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur, Member

Present:-

For the Complainant: Sh. Jai Gopar Goyal counsel for the complainant.

For Opposite parties: Sh. Ashok Barti,counsel for opposite party No.2.

Sh.Sanjay Goyal, counsel for opposite party No.1.

ORDER

VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT:-

1. The complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended upto date (Here-in-after referred to as an 'Act'). The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant is NRI and she wanted to get fix deposit (FD) of Rs.10 lacs as such she has approached the Branch Manager of ICICI Bank Ltd., Bathinda. At that time the then Sh.Amit Ahuja was Branch Manager of the ICICI Bank Ltd. The officials of the ICICI Bank Ltd. i.e. the opposite party No.1 has opened a Saving Bank Account bearing No.016301075441 by depositing Rs.10 lacs and got the signatures of the complainant on the various printed forms alleging those to be Account opening Form etc and Fixed Deposit Form for Rs.10 lacs. The complainant in bonafide belief signed those documents and deposited Rs.10 lacs with the opposite party No.1. The opposite party No.1 instead of issuing the FDR for the amount of Rs.10 lacs, transferred the said amount to the opposite party No.2 i.e. her sister concern who is doing business of Life Insurance, without written consent of the complainant for issuing the ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Policy for a sum of Rs.10 lacs and issued a policy bearing No.14201687 dated 20.7.2010 with yearly premium of Rs.10 lacs for 10 years term in connivance with each other to cause loss to her. The complainant alleged that the opposite parties deprived her to use the amount of Rs.10 lacs. She was surprised to see the Insurance Policy instead of the FDR of Rs.10 lacs. She immediately sent a complaint to the opposite party Nos.1 and 2. The opposite party No.2 has issued her an acknowledgment with promise to revert the amount to the complainant within 3 days but nothing has been done. The opposite party No.1 vide their e-mail dated 22.11.2011 has apologized for act and conduct of their officers through Nitu Singh, process Leader Customer Care Relation and cancelled the policy with assurance to refund the premium and thereby required to send her KYC documents i.e. copy of PAN Card, Passport, Dirving Licence, self attested Cancel Cheque, payout Form, Pre-Receipt (Advance Discharge Voucher), Original Policy Certificate, NRE Bank Account Statement from 1.7.2010 to 31.7.2010. The opposite parties again vide their letter dated 23.11.2011 sent a MMT decision 'Mis-selling refund of premium basis' admitting the complaint to be correct and she has deposited the amount for FDR. The opposite party No.2 illegally issued a Life Insurance Policy by not delivering the Welcome Kit nor sent E-Welcome Kit, though she was tagged as NRI Customer and also due to ISD number, Welcome letter was not sent by the opposite parties and it is also admitted by the Sales Officer that it is the clear case of mis-selling of the policy as admitted by their officials and also admitted that the complainant demanded for refund since the policy was wrongly done instead of issuance of FDR without her consent. The opposite parties admitted that she has signed the Blank performa documents in good faith whether it was the policy form or FDR Form with promise that documents shall be sent to her at Canada address which was not done. She came back to India by spending more than Rs.75,000/- for her fare for both sides and also has to stay for more than 2-3 months in India for getting the refund of Rs.10 lacs and also took furnished accommodation by paying Rs.20,000/- per month for 3 months and also has to suffer a loss of her job from 'India Today' Ontario Canada. The complainant further alleged that the opposite parties got her signatures on blank documents i.e. Advance Discharge receipt with copy of passport, Cancel Cheque for issuance of refund of FDR of Rs.10 lacs transfeered by the opposite party No.1 in favour of the opposite party No.2 from her account and she sent the same to get the refund as promised by the opposite parties but only the original amount of Rs.10 lacs was refunded and no interest was paid on that amount. Hence, the complainant has filed the present complaint for seeking the directions to the opposite parties to pay 12% p.a interest on FDR amount of Rs.10 lacs from the date of deposit till realization, the amount of rent of accommodation in India for 3 months @ Rs.20,000/- per month i.e. Rs.60,000/- and Rs.35,000/- as fare for coming back to India from Canada alongwith cost and compensation.

2. The notice was issued to the opposite parties. The opposite party No.1 after appearing before this forum has filed its written statement and pleaded that the complainant has concealed the material facts from this Forum as she with her free will signed the proposal form and it is very strange that an educated lady could sign the documents understanding those to be account opening form. The complainant with free will chose to purchase the insurance policy and thereafter she might not be satisfied with the insurance policy purchased by her and as per right available to her she got cancelled her policy and she was given full refund of the amount and now she cannot claim that she is also entitled to interest of the amount. The attorney Karamjit Singh is not having valid power of attorney from Sukhvir Kaur Sidhu. The opposite party No.1 has denied that the complainant has ever requested the opposite parties to get her FDR of Rs.10 lacs rather she wanted to purchase an insurance policy and on her request insurance policy was sold to her and she with her free will signed the proposal form. The opposite party No.2 is altogether a different concern having different incorporation certificate and it is denied that the opposite party No.1 transferred the amount to the opposite party no.2 rather the complainant herself signed the cheque in favour of the opposite party No.2 and there was no conspiracy between the opposite party Nos.1 and 2 rather she first of all purchased the policy and thereafter changed her mind and got it cancelled. The full amount has been refunded to the complainant without deducting any tax etc. which shows that there was no malafide intention on part of the opposite parties.

3. The opposite party No.2 after appearing before this forum has filed its written statement and has pleaded that the ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Company is a separate entity legally as well as it has nothing to do with the business conducted by other institutions or agents including the ICICI Bank Ltd. The ICICI Predential Life Insurance Company Ltd. has a separate legal, financial and administrative set up from that of ICICI Bank Ltd. The opposite party No.2 has received a duly filled application form on behalf of the complainant. Relying on the details furnished in the proposal form by the complainant and the opposite party No.2 issued the policy to the complainant. The complainant has alleged that the policy was an outcome of the misselling committed on the part of the ICICI Bank and hence to get the money refunded, she had to come to India and spent sometime also. As such the instant complaint sought for the interest, compensation and accommodation expenses but no misselling was committed by the opposite party No.2. The opposite party No.2 issued the policy after receipt of the duly filled and signed proposal form alongwith the requisite KYC documents. The complainant approached the opposite party No.2 for cancellation of the policy under free look provision. The request for cancellation was received after the expiry of 15 days time yet it was considered and without admitting its liability, it has processed the free look cancellation request. The opposite party No.2 under special circumstances has extended the free look period and returned the complete amount without deducting the stamp and other charges that was incurred under the policy. The policy was issued to the complainant as per his requirement and on the basis of details furnished in the proposal form.

4. The parties have led their evidence in support of their respective pleadings.

5. Arguments heard. The record alongwith written submissions submitted by the parties perused.

6. The submissions of the complainant are that being NRI she wanted to get fix deposit (FD) of Rs.10 lacs as such she approached the Branch Manager of ICICI Bank Ltd., Bathinda. At that time the then Sh.Amit Ahuja was Branch Manager of the ICICI Bank Ltd. The officials of the opposite party No.1 opened a Saving Bank Account bearing No.016301075441 by depositing Rs.10 lacs and took the signatures on the various printed forms alleging to be Account opening Form etc and Fixed Deposit Form for Rs.10 lacs. She bonafidely signed those documents but the opposite party No.1 instead of issuing the FDR for the amount of Rs.10 lacs, transferred the said amount to the opposite party No.2 i.e. her sister concern doing business of Life Insurance, without obtaining written consent of the complainant. The ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Policy for a sum of Rs.10 lacs was issued for 10 years term in connivance with each other to cause loss to her. The complainant was surprised to see the Insurance Policy instead of issuing the FDR of Rs.10 lacs. She immediately sent a complaint to the opposite party Nos.1 and 2. The opposite party No.2 has issued an acknowledgment of the complaint with promise to revert the amount to the complainant within 3 days but nothing has been done. The opposite party No.1 vide their e-mail dated 22.11.2011 apologized for their act and conduct through their officer Nitu Singh, process Leader Customer Care Relation and cancelled the policy with assurance to refund the premium and thereby required to send her KYC documents i.e. copy of PAN Card, Passport, Dirving Licence, self attested Cancel Cheque, payout Form, Pre-Receipt (Advance Discharge Voucher), Original Policy Certificate, NRE Bank Account Statement from 1.7.2010 to 31.7.2010. The opposite parties again vide their letter dated 23.11.2011 sent a MMT decision 'Mis-selling refund of premium basis' admitting the complaint to be correct and the complainant deposited the amount for FDR. The opposite party No.2 issued a Life Insurance Policy by not delivering the Welcome Kit nor sent E-Welcome Kit, as the complainant was NRI Customer. On the request of the opposite parties the amount of Rs.10 lacs was refunded to her but no interest has been paid on the said amount. The complainant has to spend more than Rs.75,000/- for her fare for both sides and for her stay for more than 2-3 months in India for getting the refund of Rs.10 lacs and then took furnished accommodation by paying Rs.20,000/- per month for 3 months and has to suffer a loss of her job from 'India Today' Ontario Canada due to the act and conduct of the opposite parties.

7. The submissions of the opposite party Nos.1 and 2 are that on the request of the complainant the insurance policy was sold to her and she with her free will signed the proposal form. She being an educated lady cannot sign the documents of proposal form by understanding those to be account opening form. The complainant with free will chose to purchase the insurance policy and thereafter she might not be satisfied with the insurance policy purchased by her and as per right available to her she got cancelled her policy and she was given full refund of the amount. The complainant had purchased the policy with her own independent will. As the request was received from the complainant, the opposite party No.2 immediately refund the amount despite the fact that the period of 15 days has already been lapsed. Now, she is not entitled to any benefit as she has purchased the policy with her free will. The details furnished in her proposal form are reproduced as under:-

The opposite party No.2 in accordance with Clause 6(2) of the insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (Protection of Policy Holder's Interests) Regulations,2002 every policy document sent by it is accompanied by a forwarding letter which clearly mentions that in case Policyholder is not satisfied with the features or terms and conditions of the policy he can withdraw/return the policy within 15 days i.e. under the 'Free Look Period' provision. As per regulation 4(1) of the IRDA Regulation a copy of the proposal form duly signed by the policyholder is sent to the policyholder alongwith the policy document thereby giving an opportunity to the policyholder to re-examine the replies made by him/her in the proposal. The request of the cancellation was received after the period of 15 days and even after the expiry of 15 days time her request was considered and without admitting any liability has processed the freelook cancellation request and has refunded the premium of Rs.10 lacs without deducting the charges of stamp duty and processing charges.

8. A perusal of Ex.C2 shows that the plan given to the complainant was ICICI Prudential Lifestage Pension Ad, UIN 1052 100V01. The description of the policy is as such:-

Initially the amount was got deposited by her by conveying her that her amount is to be deposited in the shape of FDR but without her consent, the insurance policy for 10 lacs has been issued to her. When the fact came to the knowledge of the complainant that her amount has been sent towards the premium of the insurance policy instead of depositing it in the shape of FDR, she had requested the opposite parties to refund the amount. On her request, the opposite parties have sent an e-mail dated 22.11.2011 vide Ex.C6 in which Nitu Singh the official of the opposite party No.2 has apologized for inconvenience cause to the complainant on behalf of the opposite party No.2 and asked to give some KYC documents. The relevant portion of Ex.C6 is reproduced as under:-

“We refer to your concern addressed to our Senior Management pertaining to your ICICI Pru Lifestage Pension Ad (UIN 105L 100V01) policy number 14201687

At the onset please accept my sincere apologies for the inconvenience cause to you in this regards.

As per my telephonic conversation with your Mr.Sukhvircharan earlier today. We have confirm him that post assessing the concern highlighted by you, we shall be cancelling the above mentioned policy and will process the refund of premium.

Further to initiate the cancellation for above mentioned policy. We would require you to kindly submit the below mentioned documents to any of our ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Company Ltd. branch or you can send me the scanned copy of documents via email also.

. KYC document of policy's owner/proposer-PAN card copy/a passport copy/a driver licence which is self attested will be accepted.

. Cancelled cheque (if the name is not printed on cheque then a copy of bank statement/pass book is required)

. Attached payout from

. Attached duly signed Advance discharge voucher

. Original policy certificate.

. NRE Bank Account Statement (from July 1^st,2010 to July 31^st, 2010).”

Thereafter the opposite parties sent MMT decision misselling refund of premium basis vide Ex.C7. The relevant portion of the MMT is reproduced as under:-

“MMT Decision: misselling refund of premium basis

Customer trigger for complaint is correct.

Her purpose was related to FD however we issued policy.

Customer education -HSC

Welcome kit was not delivered

We have not sent the E-welcome kit also though she was tagged as a NRI.

Due to ISD number welcome calling was not done.

Sales revert:miselling proven.

Customer Complaint:went to IBANK Bathinda Branch for FD however issued the said policy without her consent. She has signed the documents which was blank unable to check whether it was a policy. She was promised that she will get the documents to her Canada address which was not done.

Customer demand:refund.”

The advance discharge voucher/consent was got signed by the complainant vide Ex.C8 on dated 23.11.2011. The relevant portion of advance discharge voucher/consent is reproduced as under:-

“I hereby declare that the said amount has been received by me as full and final settlement in the above mentioned policy and on the said payment being made, the subject policy shall stand terminated and no benefits will be payable under the same and the Company and all its officials will stand discharged from all its claims and liabilities, direct and indirect whatsoever arising in respect of the above mentioned policy. I also undertake that if I pursue any legal action against ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Company Ltd. then the same would be at my cost and expenses.”

A further perusal of Ex.C8 shows that declaration for signing in Vernacular Language or affixing thumb impression, the columns of the name, address and signatures of the witness are blank. The cheque was issued to the complainant after getting signed its advance discharge voucher/consent on 23.11.2010.

9. The contention of the complainant is that as there is breach of trust as the complainant has requested the opposite parties to deposit her amount of 10 lacs in shape of FDR but they inconnivance with the opposite party No.2 got issued the policy of ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Ltd. depriving her to get the interest on the amount of Rs.10 lacs as per the existing rate of interest on FDR.

10. The opposite parties have submitted on the legal side that the opposite party Nos.1 and 2 are different entities and they have no relationship with each other. A bare perusal of reply of the opposite parties and their affidavit shows that both are sisters concerns. If these would have not been sisters concerns, the opposite parties must have sent the premium of Rs.10 lacs to some other insurance company. The amount of Rs.10 lacs has refunded to the complainant before filing of this complaint. Ex.C6 the apologies on the part of the official of the opposite party No.2 shows that the opposite party No.1 has intentionally not deposited the amount of Rs.10 lacs of the complainant in the shape of FDR rather has it paid towards the premium of insurance policy. Although, the amount of Rs.10 lacs has been refunded to the complainant by the opposite parties before filing of this complaint yet there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties as they have kept a huge amount of the complainant with them without paying any interest to her.

11. Therefore, in view of what has been discussed above, the opposite parties have used the amount of Rs.10 lacs of the complainant. Thus there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party No.1. Thus this complaint is accepted against the opposite party No.1 with Rs.20,000/- as cost and compensation and dismissed qua opposite party No.2. The opposite party No.1 is further directed to pay the interest @ 9% per annum since deposit of Rs.10 lacs with the opposite parties till the date of refund. The compliance of this order be done within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

12 A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record room.

Pronounced in open Forum:-

29-08-2012

(Vikramjit Kaur Soni)

President

(Sukhwinder Kaur)

Member