Delhi

East Delhi

CC/960/2014

NANDAN - Complainant(s)

Versus

LIC - Opp.Party(s)

09 Apr 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM (EAST)

GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI

CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, FIRST FLOOR,

SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI – 110 092

 

C.C. NO. 960/14

Shri SHIV NANDAN SHARMA

R/O D-216, 3^RD FLOOR,

1.  

 

Vs

 

 

LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,

BRANCH OFFICE-320, LAXMI INSURANCE BUILDING,

ASAF ALI ROAD,

NEW DELHI-110002                                                              ….Opponent

 

Date of Institution: 14.10.2014

Judgment Reserved for: 09.04.2018

Judgment Passed on: 10.04.2018

 

 

Order By: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Charya (Member)

JUDGEMENT

 

1. Jurisdiction of this Forum has been invoked by the complainant with the allegations of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of OP (LIC).
2.  Briefly stated the facts of the present complaint are that the complainant had purchased the policy bearing No.120411220 on 28.02.1997 with maturity date 28.02.2014. The said policy was “Pension Plan Policy” with yearly premium of Rs.5001/-. On 27.09.2013, the complainant received a letter regarding the surrender request of the above mentioned policy to which the complainant immediately disaffirmed by visiting the office of OP stating that no such request had been made from his side. It has been stated by the complainant that vide letter dated 06.02.2014, his policy had been fraudulently surrendered by someone. The complainant has stated that he received a letter from OP stating that a complaint had been lodged with Kamla Market Police Station regarding a fraudulent surrender and was requested by OP to handover a copy of the Pan Card and Voter ID Card for verification. It has been further stated that the complainant fulfilled all the formalities for processing the maturity value by submitting the documents on 17.02.2014 but the amount had not been remitted despite lapse of eight months. Hence, the present complaint seeking directions to OP to release the maturity amount with 18% interest, Rs.70,000/- for compensation for harassment, mental agony, pain and Rs.25,000/- as to the cost of litigation.

The complainant has annexed a copy of the policy bond, letters dated 27.09.2013, 02.11.2013, copy of the letter to Police Station Kamla Market dated 30.11.2014, letter dated 03.12.2013, 11.12.2013 to the complainant, FIR dated 30.01.2014 with Police Station: Kamla Market, documents given by the complainant to OP duly received by OP on 17.02.2013, letter written by complainant to OP to reinstate which is dated 06.02.2013, option form along with NEFT application form, letter by OP dated 30.04.2014 and emails, with the complaint.

3. Notice of the present complaint was served upon OP thereafter reply was filed wherein it was submitted that someone has fraudulently taken the payment of Rs.2,27,019/- from Travancore, Parliament Street branch in above policy which was in the name of the complainant, which only came to their knowledge on 04.11.2013 when they were informed by the complainant. Despite, making sincere efforts, the person could not be traced. Thus, FIR dated 30.01.2014 was registered in Police Station Kamla Market. It was further submitted that the policy of the complainant has been reinstated and the payment of 25% NCO (commuted value) of Rs.59,253/- had been transferred to the complainant’s account through NEFT and also annuity of Rs.19,625/- as opted by the complainant would be released by IPP cell against the balance of Rs.1,77,761/-.

NEFT paid details and payment details, status report and claim payment voucher has been annexed with the reply.

4. Evidence by way of affidavit was filed by the complainant where he has deposed the contents of the complaint and has relied on the documents annexed.
5. Shri D.K.Joshi, Manager (L&HPG) of OP was examined who has reiterated the contents of their written statement and has got exhibited the policy bond as Ex. RW1/1, letter dated 30.03.2015, option form NEFT form, status report along with claim voucher as Ex. RW1/6 (colly).
6. We have heard the argument on behalf of Ld. Counsel for the complainant and Ld. Counsel for the OP and have perused the material placed on record.

As this is the case where the fraud has been played by someone on OP by surrendering the policy of the complainant for which FIR was got registered. When it came to the knowledge of OP. On enquiry, it was submitted by counsel for the complainant that the amount had been transferred to the complainant. When the complainant has received the amount and OP has put in all the efforts to trace the person responsible for fraudulent transaction, no deficiency or unfair trade practice can be attributed on the part of OP, hence the present complaint has been dismissed as nothing remains.

   Copy of this order be sent to both the parties as per law.

 

 

 (Dr. P.N. TIWARI)                                       (HARPREET KAUR CHARYA)              

       MEMBER                                                                 MEMBER  

 

 

                                      (SUKHDEV SINGH)

                                                             PRESIDENT