Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 483.
Instituted on : 21.08.2017.
Decided on : 21.01.2019
Krishna Dahiya, aged about 76 years, wife of Sh. Ranbir Singh Dahiya, Resident of 258/F, Vidya Niketan Road, Rohtak, Model Town, Rohtak, Mobile No. 8813888036.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
1. ICICI Prudential Life Insurance office at 1st Floor, Ashok Plaza, Rohtak through its Head Office Incharge.
2. Ms. Nupur Makkar authorized Advisor ICICI Prudential Mutual Funds Code/License No. 01224361, Office at Unit No. 31, Ground Floor, Ashoka Plaza, Rohtak.
……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
SMT. SAROJ BALA BOHRA, MEMBER.
Present: Sh. Jitender Hooda, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh. M.K. Munjal, Advocate for the opposite party No. 1.
Sh. V.P. Dua, Advocate for opposite party No. 2.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case are that the complainant wanted to invest money in ICICI Prudential Mutual Funds and for that the agent of OP No. 1 i.e. OP No. 2 contacted the complainant and on her assurance the complainant invested Rs.2,00,000/- in July, 2016 and Rs.3,00,000/- in May, 2016 with the OP No. 1. OP No. 2 had told the complainant that this is a one-time investment. That during the period of one year complainant asked the OP No. 1 many times about the policy and documents regarding his investment of Rs.5,00,000/- but the OP No. 2 did not provide any detail or document regarding the investment of the complaint. After one year, complainant received two policies bearing No. 20132469 date of commencement 13.07.2016 of Rs.2,00,000/- and policy No.20026988 date of commencement 26.05.2016 of Rs.3,00,000/-. After going through the policies, the complainant came to know that the premium of these policies has to be paid yearly and their date of maturity is after twenty years. Complainant contacted the OPs No. 1 and 2 regarding the cancellation of policies as she is 76 years old and is unable to pay the annual premium of Rs.2,00,000/- for the next twenty years. It is further alleged that the application regarding this was duly received by OP No. 1 on 30.06.2017 and OP No. 1 has assured to refund the amount to the complainant alongwith interest. But till today the complainant has not received any refund amount from the OPs. That the act of opposite parties of not refunding the alleged amount is illegal and there is deficiency in service on the part of OPs. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that OPs may kindly be directed to refund the alleged policy amount of Rs.5,00,000/- alongwith interest, Rs.50,000/- as compensation and Rs.11,000/- as litigation expenses as explained in relief clause to the complainant.
2. After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite parties. Opposite party No. 1 in its reply has submitted that on the basis of the proposal form and customer declaration form, the subject policies were issued to the complainant. That the premiums under the subject policy was to be paid for 5 years and 10 years annually however the complainant herein only paid the first year premium only. It is further submitted that the complainant had himself opted for Yearly/Annual premium which clearly indicated in the proposal form. It is also submitted that the policy was duly dispatched vide Blue Dart Courier Airway Bill No. 33491828031 on 02.08.2016 and other vide EM mode on 27.05.2016 and the same were duly received by the complainant. It is denied that the complainant approached the OP with any cancellation request during the free-look period. It is pertinent to mention that it was only on 25.04.2017 i.e. after a period of more than 9 months the complainant submitted a grievance complaint only for policy No.20132469 and the same was duly replied vide letter dated 02.05.2017. It is also submitted that the policy holder had not approached the OP during the free look period with any of her grievance regarding the policy or its terms and conditions. Lastly prayed for dismissal of complaint qua the OP No. 1.
3. Opposite party no.2 in its written reply has submitted that there was no contract between the complainant and the answering respondent regarding the deal. The complainant has not alleged that she paid the amount to the answering opposite party. The payment was paid to the Insurance company and the Insurance company had issued the policy to the complainant and also issued the receipt thereof to the complainant or the person authorized to receive the policy and receipt. The commission under the policy is to be paid to the agent only when the policy becomes final. That complainant himself opted for the policy and there is no deficiency in service on the part of answering opposites party. It is prayed that complaint may kindly be qua the OP No. 2.
4. Ld. counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C4 and has closed his evidence on dated 21.03.2018. On the other hand, learned counsel for the OP No. 1 has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A and documents Ex.R1 & Ex.R5 and has closed his evidence on dated 04.10.2018. On the other hand, learned counsel for OP No. 2 has tendered affidavit Ex.RW2/A and closed his evidence on dated 10.08.2018.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
6. After going through the file and hearing the parties it is observed that as per the complainant, she approached the respondent no.2 i.e. agent of opposite party No.1 regarding one time investment. She handed over an amount of Rs.200000/- to the respondent no.2 for the one time investment. The amount was invested and complainant demanded detail regarding the investment and also demanded the relevant documents but the same were not provided to the complainant either by the respondent no.1 or by respondent no.2. After one year when the complainant received the policy, at that time, she came to know that the amount was invested in a long term policy for 20 years and the premium was to be paid for 10 years and she immediately approached to the opposite parties to surrender the policy but the opposite parties have not refunded the alleged amount to the complainant. It is also observed that the complainant was 76 years old in 2016 and it cannot be believed that he will pay such a huge amount of premium for the next 10 years. At the age of 76 years, it is possible for the grandparents to deposit the amount for their grand children for one time only but it is too hard to deposit such a huge premium for the next 10 years. Hence it is proved that the policy was sold by the opposite party No.2 to the complainant on misrepresentation of facts/false grounds. On the other hand, as per the opposite party no.1, the policy bearing no.20132469 was duly dispatched vide Blue Dart Courier Airway Bill No.33491828031 on 02.08.2016 and the same was duly received by the complainant on 04.08.2016 and other policy was dispatched vide Electronic Mode on 27.05.2016. As the complainant approached the OP company after the free-look period, hence his request was cancelled. In this regard it is observed that opposite party no.1 has not placed on record any document e.g. postal receipt/courier receipt/electronic mode proof or any other document etc. to prove that the alleged policies were dispatched on 02.08.2016 and 27.05.2016 respectively and the complainant had received the same on 04.08.2016. As such the opposite parties cannot take the benefit of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy and are liable to refund the amount deposited by the complainant.
7. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party No.1 to refund the amount of premium of alleged two policies deposited by the complainant i.e.Rs.500000/-(Rupees five lacs only) and also to pay a sum of Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision, failing which opposite party No.1 shall be liable to pay interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing the present complaint i.e. 21.08.2017 till its realization to the complainant.
8. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
21.01.2019. ................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
……………………………….
Saroj Bala Bohra, Member.
