D.O.F:29/09/2022

                                                                                                   D.O.O:15/03/2023

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION    KASARAGOD

      CC.No.244/2022

Dated this, the 15^th day of March 2023

PRESENT:                                                  

SRI.KRISHNAN.K                         :PRESIDENT

SRI.RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.M : MEMBER

SMT.BEENA.K.G                        : MEMBER

Abdul Salam Kallatra,

S/o Abdul Kader Haji,

Mubarak Manzil,

Melparamba,                                                             : Complainant

Kasaragod - 671317

(Adv. Shajid Kammadam)

                                        And

ICICI Bank,

Ground Floor,                                

City Center,                                                              : Opposite Party

Bank Road,

Kasaragod – 671121

Rep by its authorized officer

ORDER

SMT.BEENA.K.G: MEMBER

The fact of the case in brief is as follows:-

The Complainant availed the banking service from the Opposite Party and thereby opened a Savings Bank account with Opposite Party.  The Complainant availed unit linked plan which provides complete financial protection for subscribers.  The Complainant had to remit Rs.50,000/- towards yearly premium.  The premium is being paid through the savings bank account mentioned above.  In the month of August2022 the Complainant kept an amount of Rs.50,000/- in his account to remit the ULIP link only towards the payment of the ULIP linked premium.  Accordingly on 29/08/2022 he tried to transfer Rs.50,000/- only towards ULIP linked premium.  But the transaction failed for want of sufficient fund.  The Complainant made an enquiry with the bank to know why he no longer have access to his own fund, the Complainant then checked his balance in the savings bank account and understood that the Opposite Party arbitrarily deducted Rs.35,831/- only on 24/08/2022.  The Complainant immediately had brought the same to the notice of the Opposite Party but they did not heed the request.  The bank failed to explain to the Complainant about the illegal deduction.  The Complainant deprived of his peace of mind and had spent the time in worry.  The deduction carried out by the bank was done without consultation of the Complainant.  All this acts of opposite party resulted in delaying the payment of his insurance premium for one day.  The Complainant immediately arranged Rs.50,000/- from other sources for the payment of ULIP linked premium.  The act of Opposite Party amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency of service.  All these caused mental agony and emotional insult to the complainant.  The complainant has valued the claim for Rs.4,75,000/- only. 

Notice to Opposite Party served but they remained absent name called absent set exparte.

The complainant filed affidavit in lieu of chief examination and Ext.A1 marked.  The issues raised for consideration are:-

1. Whether there is deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of Opposite Party?
2. If so what is the relief?

For convenience issues No.1 and 2 can be discussed together.  The complainant had availed unit linked plan which provides complete financial protection for subscribers loved ones through life coverand gives them the potential to create wealth and save for the future.

          As per the scheme the Complainant have to remit Rs.50.000/- toward yearly premium.  The premium is paid through the savings account in Opposite Party Bank.  Accordingly on 29/08/2022 the Complainant tried to transfer Rs.50,000/- only towards the ULIP linked premium.  The transaction failed for want of sufficient fund.  The Complainant on enquiry with the bank account understood that the Opposite party illegally deducted Rs.35,837/- only on 24/08/2022.  So he could not pay the premium in time. Ext.A1 is the savings bank account details dated 30/08/202.  The Complainant brought the same to the notice of the Opposite Party, but they failed to give any explanation for the deduction.  The deduction was done by the opposite party without the consultation of the complainant.  The Complainant have immediately arranged Rs.50,000/-  for payment of ULIP linked premium.  The Complainant alleges that opposite party is failed to comply the basic banking right of the customer.  The act of Opposite Party amounts to unfair trade practice and deficiency of service which caused mental agony financial loss and emotional insult to the Complainant.  While perusing the affidavit and Ext.A1 document the commission holds that there is indeed deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of Opposite Party.  Deduction of the amount from the Complainant’s account without his consent amounts to unfair trade practice due to which the Complainant could not transfer the insurance premium in time caused mental agony and financial loss to the Complainant.

          The Complainant entitled for relief.  The Complainant valued his claim for Rs.4,75,000/-  but there is no evidence for such a huge loss.  Considering the circumstances of the Complainant we are of the view that an amount of Rs.50,000/- is the reasonable compensation in this case.

          Therefore the complaint is allowed directing Opposite Parties to pay Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand Only) to the Complainant along with Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand only) as cost.

Time for compliance is 30 days from receipt of the copy of this judgement

     Sd/-                                                     Sd/-                                        Sd/-

MEMBER                                          MEMBER                             PRESIDENT

Exhibit

A1:  Summary of Account

    Sd/-                                                                Sd/-                                        Sd/-

MEMBER                                                    MEMBER                                PRESIDENT

Forwarded by Order

                                                                      Assistant Registrar

Ps/