This appeal is preferred against the Final Order and Judgement dated 31.07.2019 in CC No 9 of 2017 delivered by Ld. D.C.D.R.F., Jalpaiguri. The fact of the case in nutshell is that one Abdul Kader had purchased a Life Insurance Policy from the HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co. Ltd. on 22.12.2014 by paying annual premium of Rs. 30,000/- and the sum assured was Rs. 3 Lakh. During the policy period the said policy holder Abdul Kader has expired and his nominee that is wife Lili Parveen pursued a claim application before the HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co. Ltd. for receiving the insured amount which was repudiated on the part of the Insurance Company on the ground that after, investigation by them found that the insured had purchased the said policy by suppressing some material facts at the time of insurance agreement and it was detected that the income of the policy holder has mentioned in the agreement was far less and shortage of the actual income of the policy holder. The Insurance Company has repudiated the claim. The wife of the deceased Abdul Kader registered the instant Consumer Complaint against the Branch Manger of HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co. Ltd., Branch Manager of HDFC Bank Falakata Road, Regional Head of HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co. Ltd and Office-in-Charge of Bludart Currier Service. HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co. Ltd has contested the case by filing the Written Statement and contended that after acceptance of the proposal filled up by the insured the policy documents were discharged wherein terms and conditions of the policy have been clearly stated mode, method and payment of premium over clearly mentioned to the policy documents. And the policy premium was settled at the rate of Rs. 30 thousand Per-annum for ten years on the basis of annual income mentioned in the policy document by the insured. And the Company has rightly repudiated the claim as after investigation it was detected that annual income of Abdul Kader was less than Rs. 50,000/-Per-annum. He was a BPL ration card holder and for that reason the death claim was rejected due to non-disclosure of material facts at the time of purchasing the policy. The HDFC Bank that is the appellant of this case in their W.V mentioned that Opposite Party No. 2 of this case that is appellant Bank only is related to banking functions and this Bank was in no way connected with the policy of Abdul Kader. The further case of the HDFC Bank is that the HDFC Bank only related to financial businesses and did not render any insurance policy to any one and never received any premium towards any insurance policy and HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co. Ltd. is a separate company having no identity or connection with the HDFC Bank. So, no liability was there on their part in the instant case. Ld. Forum after recording evidences passed Final order where the Ld. Forum makes liable both the HDFC Bank and the HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co. Ltd. to pay the compensation jointly and separately. Being aggrieved with this order this appeal follows on the ground that order of Ld. Forum is unauthorized in law and misappreciation of evidence on record and misinterpretation of law and liable to be set aside. The appeal is registered in due course and notice was sent to the respondents Lili Parveen, HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co. Ltd and Bludart Currier Service. Bludart Currier Service has contested the appeal though no written note of argument was submitted on their part. The HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co. Ltd also has contested the appeal through Ld. Advocate and files the Written Note of Argument. The appellant HDFC Bank has conducted the hearing through their Ld. Advocate Mr. B. Saha and S. Dutta. The respondent No. 1 Lili Parveen in spite of receiving the notice did not contest the appeal.

Decision with reasons

At the time of hearing of the appeal Ld. Advocate of the HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co. Ltd. through their Ld. Lawyer mentioned before this Commission that as per direction of the Ld. D.C.D.R.F., Jalpaiguri they have already complied the order by paying the proportionate decretal amount on their part without challenging the Final Order of the Ld. Forum in appeal. Having heard the Ld. Advocate of the respondent No. 4 Bludart Currier Service it is revealed that in this case they had no active role to play only they had transported some letters and documents of correspondents between he claimant and the Insurance Company. Ld. Advocate of the appellant at the time of argument mentioned that in the instant case the Complainant Lili Parveen has prayed for directing the HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co. Ltd. to pay the sum assured including interest. While the Ld. Forum through mistake has asked the HDFC Bank to pay the proportionate share of Rs. 3 Lakh including interest which is not at all acceptable in the Eye of Law. Ld. Advocate further mentioned the factual matrix of the case clearly indicates that the Ld. Forum has no occasion to hold that there was deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of the appellant Bank. He, further argued that HDFC Bank in this particular case has acted as referral agent of HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co. Ltd. having no insurance business and there was no contact between the insured and the HDFC Bank towards the instant policy of the insured and as such the HDFC Bank had no connection with the repudiation of claim as alleged in the instant Consumer Complaint. The Ld. Advocate further submits that admittedly in our banking system being a banker HDFC Bank carried the banking business and did not render any insurance policy to the husband of the Complainant and also did not receive any premium of the insurance policy from the insured. It is further submitted on the part of the Bank that HDFC Bank and HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co. Ltd. are two separate legal entities having different trade and business. Here in this particular case the HDFC Bank has acted as referral agent when the insured Abdul Kader came to the Bank for taking advise of investment of money and then as a referral agent the HDFC Bank has referred him to the HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co. Ltd. for investment of money in order to gain more than the interest of fixed deposits. It is further argued on the part of the appellant Bank that whenever any customer of Bank approaches for any insurance policy then the Bank advise the client to go to HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co. Ltd. for channelizing role of Bank’s account holder to HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co. Ltd. which does not amount to render insurance service by the Bank. When the customer of the Bank is being referred to the HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co. Ltd. The role of Bank comes to an end. and for that reason the HDFC Bank had no connection in the instant case but unfortunately the HDFC Bank has become liable to pay the compensation which is unwanted and unwarranted in law.

After, going through the pleadings very carefully and after hearing the valuable arguments canvassed before the Bench, we find some irregularities in the order of Ld. Forum firstly as because actually the Complainant in the instant Consumer Complaint has casted allegations for deficiency of service, unfair trade practice etc not against the HDFC Bank but against the HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co. Ltd. HDFC Bank and HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co. Ltd. are separate financial institution. They have separate identity. No relief was also sought for against HDFC Bank by the Complainant in the Consumer Complaint but Ld. Forum was misconceived in ascertaining the truth and casted liability upon the HDFC Bank which was irregular and unauthorized in law and liable to be interfered. Thus, the appeal stands on its merit.

Hence, it’s ordered

That the appeal be and the same is allowed on merit without imposing any cost. The Final Order of Ld. Forum dated 31.07.2019 in CC No. 9 of 2017 is hereby modified to the effect that the O.P No. 2 of this case that is Branch Manager of HDFC Bank Ltd., Falakata Road, is hereby exonerated from the liabilities casted upon the Bank in the Final Order of the Ld. Forum. The remaining portion of the order of the Ld. Forum remains intact.

Let a copy of this order be supplied to the Parties free of cost and the same to be communicated to the Ld. D.C.D.R.F., Jalpaiguri.