Haryana

Kurukshetra

112/2018

Surender Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

ICICI - Opp.Party(s)

Jagdish Singh

07 Nov 2019

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KURUKSHETRA.

 

Consumer Complaint No.112 of 2018.

Date of Instt.:16.05.2018. 

                                                                        Date of Decision: 07.11.2019.

 

Surinder Kumar s/o Shri Madan Lal, r/o village Bir Khairi, Post Office Bargat, Tehsil Babain, District Kurukshetra.

                                                                        …….Complainant.                                        Versus

 

1. ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Co. Ltd., Unit No.1A & 2A, Raheja Tipco Plaza Rani Sati Marg, Malad (East), Mumbai-400097.
2. ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Co. Ltd., Branch Office: Sector-17, 1^st Floor, Kurukshetra through its Branch Manager.

                ….…Opposite parties.

 

Complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act.

 

Before       Smt. Neelam Kashyap, President.    

                   Ms. Neelam, Member.       

                   Shri Sunil Mohan Trikha, Member.                                                    

Present:     Shri Jagdish Singh, Advocate for the complainants.          

Shri Harpal Mandhan, Advocate for the opposite parties.       

 

 

ORDER

                    This is a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 moved by the complainant Surinder Kumar against ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Company Ltd., the opposite parties.

2.             The brief facts of the complaint are that agent of OPs approached the complainant and he suggested the “ICICI Pru Saving Suraksha – LP” plan to him and at that time, the agent had allured him that he had to pay Rs.1,50,000/- per annum for the period of three years only and in lieu of that payment of three consecutive premium of Rs.1,50,000/- each i.e. total sum of Rs.4,50,000/-, the company will provide three times total paid premium maturity amount i.e. 13,50,000/- after five years. After coming into the allurement of the agent, he paid Rs.1,50,000/- on 17.03.2015 and thereafter paid the regular premium of the policy. That in the month of June 2016, he received the policy bearing No.19217919 with the date of issuance 06.04.2016 of insurance and all the terms & conditions were mentioned in the policy in English language and due to this, he was not conversant about it. In the month of March 2017, on inquiry from his colleague, the complainant came to know that under the said policy the total premium is required to be paid for five years for Rs.1,50,000/- and the amount of maturity shall be payable to him after 10 years, whereas, the agent of the company had disclosed that the premium would be payable only for three years. He came to know that the agent had misrepresented the facts and has concealed the actual and true terms & conditions of the policy. Thereafter, he approached the local branch office and told all the matter of fraud of agent and requested to pay the entire amount received by them, but the OPs had refused to pay the same. Moreover, the said official told that the policy in question has already been lapsed due to non-payment of premium, but inspite of his repeated requests, the OPs refused to return back the entire premium amount alongwith interest and vested bonus, as such, there is great deficiency in services on the part of the OPs. Hence, this complaint.

3.             Upon notice, the opposite parties appeared and filed written statement raising preliminary objections regarding maintainability; cause of action and jurisdiction. It is stated that in accordance with Regulation 6 (2) and 4 (1) of the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (Protection of Policyholder’s Interests) Regulations, 2002, in case the policyholder is not satisfied with the features or terms & conditions of the policy, he can withdraw/return the policy within 15 days from the date of receipt of policy documents i.e. under the “Free Look Period” provision, but the complainant never approached the OPs during the said period raising any objection towards the terms & conditions of the policy No.19217919 and continued the said policy. The company provided life cover for the premiums paid by him during the policy period, so now the complainant cannot ask for the return of the premium. If there would have been a death claim during the policy period, then the company would have paid back the sum assured money to the nominee. It is false and frivolous that the complainant could not be able to read and understand the terms & conditions as they were in English language, as the complainant being a graduate, himself signed the BIF, CDF and self attested the identity proofs in English. So, it is clear that the complainant is well conversant with English language. The letter dated 11.01.2018 received by the company was written in English language by the complainant himself. The complainant has paid the first premium deposit of policy in dispute through DD to get the policy stated. Later on 06.04.2016, the complainant came with the ECS mandate form to change the premium payment frequency as monthly from its previous year/annual position and paid Rs.38,250/- for the months of March and April 2016. As the premium amount of Rs.13999/- was to be paid by the complainant to sustain the subject policy on the monthly premium mode, the remainder amount of Rs.1647 was deducted by the company to make good of May 2016 premium amount of Rs.13999/-. However, on the ECS debit by the company, the same was dishonoured by the complainant’s bank due to insufficient funds and hence, the policy premiums post May 2016 remained unpaid and thus the policy got foreclosed in 17.5.2018. Moreover, the complainant had not mentioned about the FIR filed against him and his wife on 10.01.2018 on the ground of ill-treatment in either of the complaints. The details of the policy is as under:-

Application Number	OS03717009
Policy Number	192117917
Policy Plan	ICICI Pru Savings Suraksha- LP, E12
Policy Status	Foreclosed on 17.5.2018
Life Assured	Surinder Kumar
Owner/proposer	Surinder Kumar
Servicing Agent	ICICI Bank Ltd RLG
DOB	13/08/1991
Sum Assured	INR 15,00,000/-
Proposal Date	17/03/2015
Proposal received Date	17/03/2015
Risk Commencement Date	17/03/2015
Policy Issue Date	17/03/2015
Premium	Rs.1,50,000/-
Total Premium Paid	Rs.1,92,885/-
Premium Frequency	Monthly
Paid to Date	17/05/2016
Policy Dispatch Date	Dispatch date 09/04/2016 Vide AWB No.40774122410 Mode BR.

 

                There is no deficiency on the part of the OPs. The rest of the contents of the complaint are denied and prayed for dismissal the same.

4.             The complainant tendered affidavit Annexure CW1/A alongwith documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-8 and closed the evidence. On the other hand, OPs tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A alongwith documents Ex.R-1 to Ex.R-6 and closed the evidence.

5.             We have heard the learned counsel of the parties and carefully gone through the case file and also the written arguments alongwith the citations, filed by the learned counsel for the OPs.

6.             The learned counsel for the complainant has reiterated all the averments mentioned in the complaint. He argued that the complainant purchased a policy bearing No.19217919 on 17.3.2015 and at the time taking the said policy, the agent of OPs assured that the complainant had to pay Rs.1,50,000/- per annum for the period of three years and after five years, he will get Rs.13,50,000 from the OPs as maturity amount. He further argued that in the month of June 2016, he received the policy in question with the terms & conditions i.e. more than one year. Thereafter, the complainant came to know that under the said policy the total premium is required to be paid for five years for Rs.1,50,000/- and the amount of maturity shall be payable to him after 10 years. He further argued that the terms & conditions of the said policy were not disclosed to the complainant by the agent of the OPs. He further argued that the complainant has also purchased another policy bearing No.19956986 from the OPs and the OPs had also not disclosed the terms & conditions of that policy to the complainant. The complainant took the policy in the year 2015, whereas, the policy in question alongwith terms & conditions were provided to him on 06.4.2016 i.e. after more than one year. He further argued that the complainant requested the OPs various times to refund the premium amount, but they refused to do so. This act and conduct of the OPs amount to unfair trade practice and deficiency on their parts.

7.             Contrary to it, the learned counsel for the OPs has argued that the complainant has paid the premium of the policy in question and terms & conditions of that policy was signed by the complainant, which is Annexure-2. He further argued that the OPs conveyed all the terms & conditions of that policy to the policy holder at the time of taking the said policy. He placed on record written argument on the case file as Mark-A.

8.             From the perusal of policy document Ex.C-1, it is found that the complainant purchased an insurance policy from the OPs bearing No.19217919 with the date of commencement 17.3.2015 and paid the premium to the OPs in this regard, but the OPs has not provided the policy in question with terms & conditions to the complainant at that time, rather provided the same to him about after one year i.e. on 09.4.2016 and this fact was also admitted by the OPs in para No.3 of their written statement. The premium of the policy was to be paid yearly/annually and on 06.4.2016, the complainant has made request to the OPs to change the same as monthly and this fact is also admitted by the OPs in their reply at sub-para No.I of para No.2 and the complainant had given the demand draft for paying the premium to the OPs, which was bounced, as such, the policy got foreclosed on 17.5.2018 by the OPs, but here there is no fault on the part of the complainant, rather the OPs are deficient one as they provided the policy in question alongwith terms & conditions to the complainant on 09.4.2016 i.e. after more than one year from the date of commencement of said policy.

9.             The learned counsel for the complainant has further contended that the terms & conditions of the policy in question were not disclosed to the complainant by the agent of the OPs, therefore, no contract of policy was executed between the parties. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the OPs produced terms & conditions of the policy as Annexure-2 and contended that all the terms & conditions of the policy were duly conveyed to the policy holder at the time of taking the said policy. However, perusal of said document Annexure-2, it is found that the terms & conditions of the policy do not bear any signature of the complainant. Since the terms & conditions of the policy were not signed by the complainant as a token of its receipt, therefore, no contract of policy was executed between the parties. As such, the complainant wants to withdraw the policy in question and demanded refund of his premium amount received by the OPs from him, but the OPs flatly refused to pay the same, therefore, this act and conduct of the OPs amount to unfair trade practice and deficiency on their parts. The citations relied upon by the learned counsel for the OPs in the written arguments, are not applicable to the present case. From the perusal of documents Ex.C-1 and Ex.C-2, it is clear that the complainant had paid total premium of Rs.1,88,250/- (1,50,000 + 38,250), therefore, the OPs are liable to refund the said amount to the complainant.

10.            In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hereby allow the present complaint partly and direct the OPs in the following manner:-

1. To pay the amount of Rs.1,88,250/- to the complainant.
2. To pay Rs.5,000/- as compensation for mental agony and         physical harassment suffered by the complainant alongwith   litigation expenses..

 

                The OPs are further directed to comply with the aforesaid directions jointly and severally within the period of 30 days from the date of communication of this order, failing which, the awarded amount shall carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of order till actual payment and the complainant will be at liberty to initiate proceedings under Section 25/27 of the Act against the OPs. Certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties concerned, forthwith, free of cost as permissible under Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record-room, after due compliance.

 

Announced in open Forum:

Dt.:07.11.2019.                                                   (Neelam Kashyap)

                                                                        President.

 

(Sunil Mohan Trikha),           (Neelam)       

Member                             Member.