BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.
Complaint No.:165 of 2015.
Date of Institution: 08.06.2015.
Date of Decision:05.09.2017
Naveen Kumar aged 37 years son of Shri Dharamchand, resident of Gulab Nagar, Court Road, Bhiwani.
….Complainant.
Versus
- Manager, Life Insurance Company, SCO 3-4-5, Sector-1, HUDA Rohtak.
- Branch Manager, LIC, Branch Office, HUDA City, Mini Sec. K Samne, Bhiwani.
...Opposite Parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT.
BEFORE: - Shri Rajesh Jindal, President
Mr. Parmod Kumar, Member
Mrs. Sudesh, Member
Present:- Shri N.K. Saini, Advocate, for complainant.
Shri M.L. Sardana, Advocate for OPs.
ORDER:-
Rajesh Jindal, President:
The case of the complainant in brief, is that the complainant had purchased a LIC policy no. 178932669 and he has paid the premium of Rs. 12,963/- vide PNB cheque dated 31.4.2014 to the OP. It is alleged that on 29.4.2014 when the complainant visited the office of the OP to get the cheque of Rs. 40,000/- then he was informed that his policy has been closed due to the non-payment of the premium for the year 2014 because the cheque of PNB remain unpaid, hence the premium was not paid. The complainant has to deposit the premium of Rs. 12,963/- alongwith interest Rs. 1386/- with the OP on 1.5.2015 and thereafter the cheque of Rs. 40,000/- was issued by the OP to the complainant. The complainant further alleged that due to the act and conduct of the respondent, he had to suffer mental agony, pain and harassment. Hence, it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of respondents and as such he had to file the present complaint for seeking compensation.
2. On appearance, the OP filed written statement alleging therein that the cheque bearing no. 469215 dated 31.4.2014 deposited by complainant for payment of premium for the year 2014 was dismissed by the drawee bank and the dishonouring of cheque keeps the policy unpaid. It is submitted that the complainant was fully aware about the dishonouring of his cheque in question. Hence, in view of the facts and circumstances mentioned above, there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties and complaint of the complainant is liable to be dismissed with costs.
3. In order to make out his case, the counsel for the complainant has tendered into the evidence documents Annexure C-1 to Annexure C-10 alongwith supporting affidavit.
4. In reply thereto, the counsel for opposite parties has tendered into the evidence documents Annexure R-1 to Annexure R-5.
5. We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard the learned counsels for the parties. The complainant has alleged that he has issued cheque dated 31.4.2014. We are enable to understand how a cheque in the month of April can be issued for 31st because the month of April consist 30 days only.
6. The complainant reiterated the contents of the complaint. He submitted that he has paid the premium of Rs. 12,963/- vide PNB cheque dated 31.4.2014 to the OP. He submitted that on 29.4.2014 when the complainant visited the office of the OP to get the cheque of Rs. 40,000/- then he was informed that his policy has been closed due to the non-payment of the premium for the year 2014. Because the cheque of PNB remain unpaid, hence the premium was not paid. The complainant has to deposit the premium of Rs. 12,963/- alongwith interest Rs. 1386/- with the OP on 1.5.2015 and thereafter the cheque of Rs. 40,000/- was issued by the OP to the complainant.
7. Learned counsel for the OPs reiterated the contents of the reply. He submitted that the cheque no. 469215 dated 31.4.2014 deposited by the complainant with OPs for the payment of premium for the year 2014 was dishonoured by the drawee bank. He further submitted that regarding the dishonor of the cheque the OP sent the intimation to the complainant vide letter dated 6.5.2014. He further submitted that as per the memo issued by the Punjab National Bank, drawee bank the payment was stopped by the complainant. Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs and the OP has legally charged Rs. 1386/- on account of interest for the earlier payment of the premium.
8. In the light of the pleadings and arguments of the parties, we have examined the relevant material on record, carefully. The complainant vehemently argued that he never stopped the payment of the cheque in question nor he received any intimation from the OP regarding dishonor of the cheque. The complainant being the advocate, we directed him to produce his affidavit that he never instructed the Punjab National Bank-drawee bank of the cheque to stop the payment of the cheque in question but the complainant failed to produce his affidavit. On the basis of the copy of letter dated 6.5.2014 issued by the OP no. 2 to the complainant regarding dishonor of cheque and the memo issued by the drawee bank regarding return of the cheque, the contention of the OPs seems to be correct, because the complainant has failed to adduce any cogent evidence to rebut the same. The complainant has failed to prove that the payment of the cheque in question was never stopped by him. Therefore, the complaint of the complainant cannot succeed. Resultantly, the complaint of the complainant is dismissed being devoid merits. No order as to costs. Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.
Announced in open Forum.
Dated: 05.09.2017. (Rajesh Jindal)
President,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.
(Parmod Kumar) (Sudesh)
Member. Member
