Per Mrs.S.P.Lale, Hon’ble Member
This complaint has been filed by the complainant Mr.Rajendra Agarwal against the opponent –Life Insurance Corporation of India alleging deficiency in service. According to complainant, he had applied for getting insurance on his life himself with opponent by proposals bearing nos.861 and 5103 dated 24/04/2001 for sum assured `5 lakhs. Complainant paid `3,36,250/- and `4,03,500/- for the said proposal. Complainant further stated that thereafter the opponent demanded the medical report from DMR and, accordingly, complainant submitted income proof, age and birth proof and also further submitted the medical certificate of their own Medical officer as required by the opponent. Complainant stated that thereafter opponent immediately issued another letter dated 01/12/2001 and demanded the medical check up by DMR (Divisional Medical Refree). According to complainant, opponents have not stated any reason why the above documents and medical report already submitted by the complainant have not been accepted by the opponent. Therefore, complainant issued legal notice dated 17/12/2001 and demanded that Jeevan Shree Policy be delivered to the complainant. Opponent even failed to reply the said notice. Therefore, it is alleged by the complainant that opponent even after accepting the deposit amount in the year 2001 failed to give Jeevan Shree Policy to the complainant till filing of the said complaint. Therefore complainant filed consumer complaint before this Commission and prayed for issuance of policy under Plan no.112 for the term of 15 years in favour of the complainant and complainant also prayed for a compensation of `4 lakhs for mental agony and `50,000/- towards the cost of the proceeding.
Opponent filed its written statement and contested the claim of the complainant. Opponent pleaded that the complainant is not a consumer as there is no concluded contract between the complainant and the opponent. Therefore, this Hon’ble Commission has no jurisdiction to try the said complaint. Opponent admitted that the complainant had submitted two proposals one bearing no.861 dated 19/05/2001 for `5 lakhs under Plan and Term 112/15 for insurance on own life and second proposal no.5103 dated 08/08/2001 under Plan & Term 112/15 for `5 lakhs and `6 lakhs respectively for insurance on own life.
It further admitted that complainant had deposited `3,36,250/- and `4,03,500/- towards proposal deposit. Opponent pleaded that vide its letter dated 23/10/2001, opponent had called upon complainant to comply with various requirements. However, complainant did not get himself rechecked by DMR and instead falsely stated that Development officer of the opponent advised him that the re-check up by the DMR is not required again. Opponent once again vide its letter dated 01/12/2001 called upon the complainant to get himself rechecked by DMR but complainant failed and neglected to comply with the said letter dated 01/12/2001. Opponents therefore have issued a cheque of `3,36,140/- being refund of the proposal amount to the complainant and another cheque of `8,32,077/- was also sent by the opponent to the complainant being the refund of the policy amount. However, complainant refused to accept the said cheque and returned to the opponent on the ground that consumer complaint is filed before this Commission. Therefore, according to opponent, there is no deficiency in service on the part of opponent and finally, prayed for dismissal of complaint.
Heard Ms.Rashmi Manne-Advocate a/w. Mr.U.B. Wavikar-Advocate for the complainant and Mr.M.V. Damle-Legal Officer of the opponent.
Admitted facts are that the complainant had submitted two proposals bearing no.861 dated 19/5/2001 for `5 lakhs under Plan and Term 112/15 for insurance on own life along with Agents Confidential Report dated 20/04/2001 and the Medical Examiners Confidential Report dated 19/05/2001 and second proposal no.5103 dated 08/08/2001 under Plan & Term 112/15, 112/15 for `5 lakhs and `6 lakhs respectively for insurance on own life along with Agents Confidential Report dated 08/08/2001 and Medical Examiners Confidential Report dated 08/08/2001. It is also an admitted fact that the complainant had deposited `3,36,250/- and `4,03,500/- towards proposal deposit against the above policies. Complainant’s contention is that he has deposited `3,36,250/- and `4,03,500/- with the opponent in the year 2001 but till filing of complaint opponent has failed to issue a policy to the complainant. As per requirement of the opponent, complainant had submitted a medical certificate of the opponent’s Medical officer, proof of income, age, birth proof, etc. However, opponent without any specific reason rejected the medical certificate of their own Medical officer and again vide their letter dated 01/12/2001 demanded medical check up by DMR. It is main contention of the complainant that opponent without assigning any reason rejected the medical certificate and other documents of the complainant which complainant had already sent in the year 2001. Therefore, according to complainant, there is deficiency in service on the part of opponent. Opponent on flimsy grounds avoided to issue policy to the complainant. Opponent vide their letter dated 01/12/2001 again demanded the medical certificate from DMR. Opponent’s contention is that since the complainant did not comply with the requirement of opponent, they could not finalize the proposal and, therefore, opponent refunded deposit amount of `3,36,150/- after deducting `110/- of the medical examination fee.
Opponent further refunded `8,32,077/- to the complainant on 31/10/2002 but the complainant has not accepted said amount and returned to the opponent on the ground that pending of the complaint before this Commission.
It is pertinent to note that opponents have refused to accept medical certificate of their own Medical officer and vide their letter dated 01/12/2001 again asked for medical check up by DMR without assigning any reason and opponent on flimsy ground made complainant run from pillar to post for medical examination and till filing of complaint they had not issued policy to the complainant even after accepting huge amount from the complainant. The opponent has used the complainant’s hard earned money for about two years. Therefore, this amounts to deficiency in service on the part of opponent. However, opponent had refunded said amount to the complainant only after filing of the complaint. Therefore, complainant is entitled for refund of the said amount along with interest from the date of deposit till refund made by the opponent. Complainant had deposited the amount with the opponent on 23/4/2001 and opponent has refunded said amount on 31/10/2002. Therefore, complainant will be entitled to get refund of deposits with interest at the rate of 12% p.a. from the date of deposit i.e. 23/04/2001 till 31/10/2002 and the complainant is also entitled for the mental agony. Opponent has accepted the amount in the year 2001 and failed to issue the policy. Complainant must have suffered mental agony. Complainant has not achieved his purpose of obtaining Jeevan Shree policy even after paying huge amount. Opponent has utilized complainant’s money for about two years. We are therefore inclined to award `10,000/- towards the compensation to the complainant. Under these circumstances, we pass the following order:-
ORDER
1. Opponent is directed to refund an amount of `3,36,250/- under Plan no.112/15 and `4,03,500/- under plan no.112/15 to the complainant together with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of deposit i.e.24/04/2001 & 24/05/2001 till the date of refund by the opponent i.e.31/10/2002.
2. Opponent is further directed to pay compensation of `10,000/- and `5,000/- towards the cost.
3. Above order shall be complied with by the opponent within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.
4. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties.
Pronounced on 13th June, 2011.
