Punjab

Ludhiana

CC/21/504

Sarita - Complainant(s)

Versus

IDFC First Bank Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Parminder Rattan

03 Jul 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, LUDHIANA.

                                                Complaint No: 504 dated 29.10.2021.                                                        Date of decision: 03.07.2024. 

 

Sarita W/o. Late Sh. Rajesh Kumar, R/o. House No.70, Ward No.28, Near Sangam Palace, Gagandeep Colony, Churpur Road, Haibowal Kalan, Ludhiana-141001.

                                                                                      ..…Complainant

                                                Versus

1. IDFC First Bank Ltd. (Capital First Home Finance Ltd.), SCO-24, 3^rd Floor, Ludhiana Trader Tower, Feroze Gandhi Market, Ludhiana, through its Branch Manager.
2. HDFC Life Insurance Company Limited, Feroze Gandhi Market, Ludhiana, through its Manager.
3. HDFC Life Insurance Company Limited, 13^th Floor, Lodha Excelus, Appollo Mills Compound, N.M. Joshi Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai-400011, Through its Director.                                                                                                                      …..Opposite parties 

Complaint Under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

QUORUM:

SH. SANJEEV BATRA, PRESIDENT

MS. MONIKA BHAGAT, MEMBER

 

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

For complainant             :         Sh. Vikrant Verma, Advocate.

For OP1                         :         Sh. Anand Sabherwal, Advocate.

For OP2 and OP3          :         Sh. Nitin Kapila, Advocate.

 

 

 

 

ORDER

PER SANJEEV BATRA, PRESIDENT

1.                Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that Sh. Rajesh Kumar, husband of the complainant, during his life time got a loan from the OP bank vide loan account No.17369035 (Lap). The loan was got secured by vide insurance policy No.PP0002201DOV00 dated 22.11.2018 of HDFC Life Insurance Company. The loan amount was paid and NOC was issued. 

                   The complainant stated that on 05.09.2019, Sh. Rajesh Kumar died at DMC Hospital, Ludhiana and the complainant being his nominee, informed the bank with request to further inform the insurance company. Thereafter, the complainant lodged a claim with the OPs along with required documents and intimated online on 28.11.2019. She made repeated requests and send reminders and Emails on 11.09.2019, 03.10.2019 and 21.11.2019 but the OPs neither replied nor paid the claim amount to the complainant. The OPs in-connivance with each other harassed the complainant by not sending the claim amount. Even the complainant sent a legal notice dated 11.01.2020 through Sh. Vikrant Verma, Advocate but no reply was given. Hence this complaint, whereby the complainant has prayed for issuing directions to the OPs to pass the claim of Rs.4,01,368/- along with compensation and litigation expenses.

2.                Upon notice, OP1 appeared and filed written statement and assailed the complaint by taking preliminary objections on the ground of maintainability; the complainant has not approached this Commission with clean hands; suppression of material facts; the complainant has no locus standi to file the present complaint; the complainant being not a consumer of the OP  etc. 

                   On merits, OP1 reiterated the crux of averments made in the preliminary objections. OP1 admitted the factum of advancement of loan to Rajesh Kumar along with Sarita, Ashok Kumar and Neelam Rani, regarding obtaining of insurance policy from HDFC Life Insurance Company and issuance of NOC after repayment of loan in the month of July 2019. However, OP1 averred that no intimation along with documents was given by the complainant regarding death of Sh. Rajesh Kumar. OP1 has denied that there is any deficiency of service and has also prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.                OP2 and OP3 filed separate written statement and assailed the complaint by taking preliminary objections on the ground of maintainability being premature; the complainant has not come to the court with clean hands; suppression of material facts;  lack of  jurisdiction and cause of action etc.  OP2 and OP3 stated that the complainant did not lodge her claim with them as she was required to first lodge the claim on prescribed format with them along with documents, which she has never submitted with them.

                   On merits, OP2 and OP3 reiterated the crux of averments made in the preliminary objections. OP2 and OP3 have denied that there is any deficiency of service and have also prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

4.                In evidence, the complainant tendered her affidavit as Ex. CA and reiterated the averments of the complaint. The complainant also placed on record documents Annexure-A is the copy of certificate of insurance w.e.f. 28.11.2018 to 27.11.2029, Annexure-B is the copy of death certificate of Rajesh Kumar, Annexure-C is the copy of Email dated 11.09.2019, Annexure-D is the copy of legal notice dated 11.01.2020, Annexure-E are the postal receipts, Annexure-F is the copy of Aadhar Card of the complainant and closed the evidence.

5.                On the other hand, the counsel for OP1 tendered affidavit Ex. RA of Sh. Manpreet Singh, Legal Manager of OP1 along with documents Ex. R1 is the copy of authority letter and closed the evidence.

                   Counsel for OP2 and OP3 tendered affidavit Ex. RB of Sh. Gurpreet Singh, Deputy Manager Legal & Compliance of HDFC Life Insurance Co. Ltd., Chandigarh branch along with documents Ex. R1 is the copy of insurance certificate w.e.f. 28.11.2018 to 27.11.2029, Ex. R2 is the copy of Schedule of Benefits of the insurance policy and closed the evidence.

6.                We have heard the arguments of the counsel for the parties and also gone through the complaint, affidavit and annexed documents and written statements along with affidavits and documents produced on record by the parties.

7.                Admittedly, one Sh. Rajesh Kumar, husband of the complainant obtained loan from OP1 and to secure the said loan, he got issued HDFC Life Group Credit Protect Plus Insurance Plan (Annexure-A = Ex. R1) from OP2 and OP3 being basis sum assured of Rs.3,15,510/- for a period of 11 years i.e. from 28.11.2018 to 27.11.2029 by way of paying single premium of Rs.17,542.36 along with taxes to the tune of Rs.3,157.62. The complainant was appointed as nomine of Sh. Rajesh Kumar. During his life time sh. Rajesh Kumar paid the entire loan amount and got issued NOC from OP1. Said Rajesh Kumar died on 05.09.2019 at DMC Hospital, Ludhiana. Intimation of his death was given to OP1 bank by the complainant along with documents for its onward submission to the insurer i.e. OP2 and OP3. OP1 as well as OP2 and OP3 in their written statements have specifically denied the factum of receipt of intimation of death Rajesh Kumar and regarding lodging of any claim with them by the complainant.  So it is evident that due to some communication gap between the parties, the claim is yet to be registered and settled as per terms of the policy.

Therefore, in the given set of facts and circumstances, it would be just and appropriate if the complainant is directed to lodge formal claim with the OPs along with necessary documents within 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of order and thereafter, OP1 being Master Policy Holder will facilitate the complainant in lodging  and pursuing the claim with OP2 and OP3 and thereafter, OP2 and OP3 shall  consider and settle the claim of the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of claim as well as documents from the complainant as per terms and conditions of the policy.  

8.                As a result of above discussion, the complaint is partly allowed with direction to the complainant to lodge formal claim with the OPs along with necessary documents within 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of order. OP1 being Master Policy Holder will facilitate the complainant in lodging and pursuing the claim with OP2 and OP3 and thereafter, OP2 and OP3 shall consider and settle the claim of the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of claim as well as documents from the complainant as per terms and conditions of the policy. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Copies of order be supplied to parties free of costs as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.  

9.                Due to huge pendency of cases, the complaint could not be decided within statutory period.

 

 

(Monika Bhagat)                              (Sanjeev Batra)               Member                                         President  

 

Announced in Open Commission.

Dated:03.07.2024.

Gobind Ram.