Punjab

Nawanshahr

CC/8/2018

Rahul Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Indusind Bank Pvt Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Ajay Murgai

04 Sep 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES   REDRESSAL FORUM, SHAHEED BHAGAT SINGH NAGAR

 

Consumer Complaint No.   08 of 12.02.2018

           Date of Decision            :   04.09.2019

         

1.       Rahul Kumar aged about 32 years s/o Sh. Surinder Kumar,

2.       Navjot aged about 21 years w/o Rahul Kumar both rs/o Guru Teg Bahadur Nagar, Gali no.2, Near Manji Saheb Gurudwara, District SBS Nagar

….. Complainants

Versus

 

1.       Indusind Bank Pvt. Ltd., Banga Road Branch, Nawanshahr, Tehsil & District SBS Nagar, through its Branch Manager Vishal Gogna aged about ___ years.

2.       Indusind Bank Pvt. Ltd, Banga Road Branch, Nawanshahr, Tehsil & District SBS Nagar through its Regional Manager Prince Mittal aged about ___ years

3.       Tata AIA Life Insurance Company 14^th Floor, Tower-A, Peninsula Business Park, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai 400013 through its Manager/Regional Manager.

…Opposite parties

 

(Complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

 

 

QUORUM:

SH.KULJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

SH.KANWALJEET SINGH, MEMBER

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

For complainant            :         Sh.Ajay Murgai, Advocate

For OPs no.1&2            :         Sh.Rajinder Singh, Advocate

For OP no.3                  :         Sh.M.P Nayar, Advocate

 

Per KULJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

 

1.                 The complainants have filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the OPs on the averments that complainant no.1 has purchased policy bearing no.U066520702 of Tata AIA Life Insurance Company for a sum of Rs.1 lac . The said policy was purchased through OP no.1/Vihal Gogna Branch Manager of OP no.2 Prince Mittal Regional Manager of Indusind Bank Banga Road, Nawanshahr. Since complainant no.1 has not received any policy but a sum of Rs.1 lac has been deducted from his account bearing no.159872670771.  Complainant no.1 has also purchased a credit card against the security of FD worth Rs.1 lac. The employees of Tata AIA Life Insurance said that the policy undelivered on 8^th November 2016 due to any reason and after that Mr. Rajan Dua came to deliver his policy on 16^th November 2016 at Nawanshahr Indusind Bank Branch and OPs no.1 and 2 submitted fake acknowledgment to TATA AIA. The complainant no.1 has not received any policy from OPs nor signed any document on that day. As per terms and conditions of the policy, vouchers worth Rs.98,000/- were to be issued and even till date complainant no.1 has not received any vouchers, whereas a sum of Rs.1,12,700/- has already been deducted from the account of complainant on 25.10.2016. Additional sum of Rs.14,700/- has been deducted from account of complainant no.1. On contacting with officials of OPs, complainant no.1 was told that tax has been deducted against the said policy  but there was no prior information supplied to complainant no.1 in this regard.  There is a provision of IRDA that one can cancel/free look his policy within 15 days after receiving the policy document and complainant no.1 has already written to OPs regarding cancellation of above referred policy and also of credit card, the credit card was cancelled and amount of credit card which was kept as security has been returned back in account of complainant no.1 but till date complainant no.1 has not received any response regarding policy from OPs.  Complainant no.1 also invested in mutual funds vide folio no. 432170838761 on the name of his wife Navjot /complainant no.2 and purchased Reliance Tax Saver Fund Dividend Option for a sum of Rs.1,75,000/- but instead of issuing the same OPs have issued Reliance Tax Saver Growth, which was another mistake of Ops. The complainants have requested many times to OPs through emails in this regard, but of no use.  They also sent legal notices to OPs dated 11.09.2017 and 01.12.2017 to OPs but no response was given by them. The complainant no.1 issued another notice to OP no.3/Tata AIA Life on 08.11.2017 in that regard. They alleged deficiency in service on the part of OPs and prayed for below noted reliefs against OPs:-

i)       OPs be directed to cancel policy bearing no. U066520702 imposed on complainant no.1 by forging signatures of complainant no.1 on fake acknowledgement and to refund the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- charged for the said policy and also to refund the amount of Rs.1,12,700/- deducted against non-issued vouchers from complainant no.1 bearing no.159872670771 and also to pay  a sum of Rs.1,75,000/- invested in mutual funds along with interest.

ii)      OPs be directed to pay Rs.7,00,000/- as compensation for mental harassment.

2.               Upon notice, OPs no.1 and 2 appeared and filed written reply and contested the complaint of the complainant by raising preliminary objections that complainants are not consumer of OPs. The complaint is false, frivolous and unsustainable. No cause of action has arisen in favour of complainants. On merits, it was averred that complainants purchased policy no.U066520702 of OP no.3 after going through application form, offer document, product brochure as provided by OP no.3 and signed the application form for purchase of policy. The entire process of applying for the policy was done between complainant and OP no.3.  The entire services after purchase of the policy including delivery of the policy documents and vouchers, if any were to be provided by OP no.3 and OP no.1 and 2 have nothing to do with the same.  The complainant purchased mutual funds from Reliance Mutual Fund Company, which has not been impleaded as party. OPs  have debited the saving account of complainant as per instructions given by complainants to Mutual Fund Company and OP has nothing to do with the fact that whether complainants has invested in Dividend Option or Growth Option of Mutal Fund. Any deficiency in service on their part was vehemently denied. Rest of the averments of the complainant were denied by OPs no.1 and 2 and they prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.               OP no.3 appeared and filed written reply and contested the complaint of the complainant by raising preliminary objections that complaint is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed as no cause of action ever arose in favour of the complainant and against OP no.3. The complainants have created false story  in their complaint to mislead the Forum. On merits, it was averred that complainant no.1/Rahul Kuamr had submitted unit linked proposal/application dated 21.10.2016 for purchase of TATA AIA Life Insurance Fortune Pro Plan for himself who is life assured in the policy, where sum assured was of Rs.10,00,000/- policy term was 15 years, premium paying term was five years and annual premium was Rs.1,00,000/- which was paid by him, vide cheque /DD drawn on Indusind Bank, Nawanshahr.  The proposal was accepted on the standard rates based on the information provided by LA and policy was issued bearing no.U066520702 dated 24.10.2016 and said policy commenced on 24.10.2016. After receipt of the proposal form and premium even OP intimated complainant, vide letter dated 02.11.2016 that his application has been approved by OP and policy would be sent to him within 30 days from the date of issue of the said letter and for any clarification he can contact help line no.18602669966 or can write through email. The complainant has already taken all the benefits of the policy for the period for which he had paid the premium.  Once the complainant has utilized the policy for which he had given the premium, he has no legal right claim the refund of Rs.1 lac. The compensation and litigation expenses etc. Any deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OP no.3 was denied. Rest of the averments were denied by OP no.3 and it prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

4.               The complainant has tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.CW-1/A alongwith copies of documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-19 and closed the evidence. As against; OPs no.1 and 2 tendered in evidence affidavit of Vishal Gupta Branch Manager as Ex.OP-1/A along with copies of documents Ex.OP-1/1 and closed the evidence. OP no.3 tendered in evidence affidavit of Harsimran Singh Manager Legal as Ex.OP-3/A along with copies of documents Ex.OP-3/1 to Ex.OP-3/7 and closed the evidence.

5.               We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case.

6.              The counsel for complainant has made statement on 26.02.2019 that as per instructions of his client, he withdraw the present complaint against complainant no.2. He press the complaint on behalf of complainant no.1 Rahul only.

7.               Counsel for OPs no.1 and 2 moved application for leading additional evidence on 31.05.2019. Same is allowed by this Forum vide order dated 10.07.2019 on the ground that documents in question are very much necessary and relevant for proper adjudication of the case in hand.

8.               Evidence on the record has been examined by us with the able assistance of counsel for the parties. The complainant no.1 deposed his deposition contained in his affidavit Ex.CW-1/A on the record. He deposed that he purchased the policy bearing no. U066520702 of Tata AIA Life Insurance Company  for a sum of Rs.1 lac through OP no.1 and 2. But he has not received any policy till date but a sum of Rs.1 lac has been deducted from his account. OPs submitted fake acknowledgement regarding receipt of policy of the complainant. He stated that he has not received any policy from OPs nor signed any document. Ex.C-1 is statement of account for the period from 02.08.2016 to 31.03.2017. Copy of passbook Ex.C-2. Enquiry particulars dated 12.09.2017 is Ex.C-3. Ex.C-4 is request letter addressed to OPs no.1 and 2 by complainant no.1 regarding cancellation of credit card. Ex.C-5 is letter dated 26.10.2017 addressed to Branch Manager Indusind Bank/Ops no.1 and 2 by complainant no.2 regarding wrongly investment of Mutal Fund in Growth Option. Ex.C-6 is letter written to Manager /OP no.3 by complainant no.1 regarding cancellation of policy as per provision of policy that they can cancel the policy within 15 days after receiving of the policy. Ex.C-8  and Ex.C-9 are  legal notices dated 11.09.2017 and 08.11.2017 served upon OPs, but no response was given to complainants and Ex.C-11 to Ex.C-13 are postal receipts thereof. Ex.C-14 is reply dated 08.12.2017 to legal notice of complainants. Similarly, we have also examined other documents Ex.C-15 to Ex.C-19 on the record.

9.               To refute this evidence of the complainant, OPs no.1 and 2 placed on record the affidavit of Vishal Gogna Branch Manager Ex.OP-1/A. This witness stated that the entire process of applying the policy was done between complainant and OP no.3 only. OPs no.1 and 2 has only acted a intermediary for reference of complainants to OP no.3. The entire services after purchase of the policy including delivery of policy documents and vouchers , if any, were provided by OP no.3 and OPs no.1 and 2 has nothing to do with the same. Ex.OP-1/1 is portfolio summary dated 10.05.2018. OPs no.1 and 2 also produced their additional evidence in support of their case. Ex.OP-1/2 is credit card application form. Ex.OP-1/3 is receiving of the credit card application. Ex.OP-1/4 is bank statement of Rahul Kumar. Ex.OP-1/5 is TATA AIA Life Insurance Application Form and Receiving. OP no.3 relied upon affidavit of Harsimran Singh Manager Legal a Ex.OP-3/A. This witness stated that proposal was provided by LA and consequently a policy was issued bearing no.U066520702 dated 24.10.2016 and said policy was commenced on same day. Policy illustrations dated 24.10.2016 duly signed by the complainant and policy information page are Ex.OP-3/2 to Ex.OP-3/4. Ex.OP-3/5 letter dated 2.11.2016 addressed to complainant no.1 regarding approval of application for policy. In this letter, OP no.3 assured the complainants that policy  would be sent to complainants within 30 days from the date of issue of the letter, but till date no policy was received by complainants. Ex.OP-3/7 is reply to legal notice dated 08.11.2017.

10.             From evaluation of above referred evidence on the record and hearing respective submissions of counsel for the parties, we conclude that OPs no.1 and 2 have produced additional evidence in support of their case. OPs no.1 and 2 produced documents Ex.OP-1/3 and Ex.OP-1/4 in which clear cut shows that complainant received the vouchers of the amounts mentioned in these documents. From document Ex.OP-1/5 it is clear that complainant received the original policy document. This document cleared that complainant received policy no.U066520702 on 16.12.2016. The signatures of complainant obtained in this document in the column “Customer Signature & date and Customer Name”. All the terms and conditions related to the policy were also supplied to the complainant in time. Ex.OP-1/5 is most relevant document in this case, which shows lapse on the part of the complainant himself not on the part of OPs. There is no cogent evidence produced by complainant to prove this fact that complainant OPs have not issued the policy document to him. The vouchers were received by complainant, vide documents Ex.OP-1/3 and Ex.OP-1/4 on the record.

11.             From the above discussion, we analysis that OPs submitted relevant documents as additional evidence in support of their case. Therefore, OPs are not liable to pay insured amount with regard to voucher worth of Rs.98,000/- and OPs rightly deducted Rs.14,700/- from the account of complainant. The tax has been deducted against on the voucher of Rs.98,000/-, which has received by complainant. OP no.3 has deducted the tax as per terms and conditions of the policy, so for this OPs are not liable to pay the tax amount. 

12.             In view of the above facts and circumstances we dismiss the complaint of the complainant. Parties are left to bear their own costs

13.               Let copies of the order be sent to the parties, as permissible, under the rules.

Dated: 04.09.2019

                                (Kanwajeet Singh)            (Kuljit Singh)

                                     Member                            President