O R D E R
SRI.D. KRISHNAPPA, PRESIDENT:
The grievance of the complainant against the Op in brief is, that he is having a credit card issued by Op No.1, Op No.2 is the service centre of Op No.1 and Op No.3 is a holding company of Ops No.1 and 2. That on 31/07/2008 he utilized his credit card for purchase of insurance policy from the Global Underwriters agency in USA. Though he had purchased one insurance policy but his statement of credit card account disclosed premium amount of Rs.25,429.25 was debited twice in two different transactions. Thereafter, he cancelled the transactions and intimated the same to the insurance company who reversed only one transaction on 09/08/2008 and re-credited Rs.23,342.63 to his account. When the second transaction on 31/07/2008 for Rs.25,429.25 was not credited to his account and he approached the insurance company who confirmed that there was only one transaction and the same was reversed as per transaction dated 09/08/2008 and he was informed to approach Ops. Then he approached OP No.2 who registered a complaint regarding not reversing the second transaction, though gave a time to him to set right his grievance has not set right the grievance. Therefore, attributing deficiency in the service of Ops in not reversing the second transaction has prayed for a direction to Ops No.1 and 2 to pay him Rs.25,429.25 with interest @ 36% p.a from 31/07/2008 till realization and to award compensation of Rs.10,000/- with cost.
2. Ops have appeared through their advocate and filed their versions admitting the issue of credit card to the complainant, have stated that the complainant by using his credit card have purchased two insurance policies with Global Underwriters on 31/07/2008 used his credit card twice for transferring Rs.25,429.25 to that insurance company. Accordingly, the said amounts have been debited to the complainant’s account and has been paid to the Global Underwriters the insurance company and have stated the complainant himself using his credit card got two amounts Rs.25,429.25 debited to his account and paid to the insurance company in which they have no role and have stated that insurance company when sent Rs.23,342.63 as desired by the complainant, the same has been credited to the account of the complainant on 09/08/2008. If the complainant has cancelled the policy with his company it is that insurance company has to pay him back Rs.25,429.25 and was accountable for not refunding that money and therefore this Op denying any deficiency in their service have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3. In the course of enquiry into the complaint, the complainant and Ops have filed their affidavit evidence reproducing what they have stated in their respective complaint and version. The complainant along with the complaint has produced copy of letter alleged to had been addressed to the insurance company canceling the insurance policy with a request to the insurance company to refund his money, with a copy of the credit card statement. Op has also produced a copy of the credit card statement of the complainant.
4. On the above contentions, following points for determination arise.
- Whether the complainant proves that the Op has caused deficiency in his service in not reversing an entry under which a sum of Rs.25,429.25 was debited and paid to the insurance company.
- To what relief the complainant is entitled to?
5. Our findings are as under:
Point No.1 : In the negative
Point No.2 : See the final order
REASONS:
6. Answer on point No.1: As admitted by the complainant himself in his complaint and also in the affidavit evidence he in order to have a life insurance from Global Underwriters which is an insurance company utilized his credit card twice for Rs.25,249.25 each. Accordingly, Ops debited those amounts and paid to Global Underwriters the insurance company. Here, we do not find any deficiency in the service of any of the Ops. The complainant realizing utilizing his credit card twice for payment of premium amounts instead of once requested the Global Underwriters to examine about payment of premium amount twice. Thus the Global Underwriters reversed an amount of Rs.23,342.63 as against Rs.25,249.45 and the same is credited to account of the complainant on 09/08/2009. The complainant is not disputing crediting of this amount to his account and he has admitted this in his complaint.
7. The complainant has further contended that he thereafter cancelled the transaction and intimated the same to the insurance company who has after reversing the amount of Rs.23,342.63 in respect of one transaction appears to have not cancelled the policy and sent another Rs.25,429.25. The complainant here what he means that is that he has cancelled the policy itself and requested the insurance company to pay back two premium amount paid by him, but the insurance company has re-paid him Rs.23,342.63 but not repaid the other premium amounting to Rs.25,429.25. Thus it is clear, it is the insurance company which has not repaid the other premium paid by him for which, Ops cannot be held responsible. Admittedly, the complainant has not filed this complaint against the insurance company and that insurance company is not at all a party in this complaint. The Ops in their version and also in the affidavit evidence have categorically stated that if the complainant has cancelled insurance policy he can only proceed against the insurance company for recovery of his premium amount. That the complainant has not pointed out any lapse on the part of these Ops therefore, they are not accountable to the complainant. From these facts, it is manifest that the complainant has failed to prove any sort of deficiency in the service of the Op and if at all if he has cancelled the policy he could proceed against the insurance company for recovery of balance amount paid by him through his credit card and it is the insurance company is accountable to him and that insurance company being not a party in this proceeding. The complainant is not entitle for any relief against the Ops. As the result, we answer point No.1 in the negative and hold that the complaint is liable to be dismissed and we pass the following order.
O R D E R
Complaint is dismissed. Parties to bear their own cost.
Dictated to the Stenographer. Got it transcribed and corrected. Pronounced in the Open forum on this the 23rd December 2010.
MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
