BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MYSORE-570023

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO.775/2015

DATED ON THIS THE 12^th August 2016

      Present:  1) Sri. H.M.Shivakumara Swamy

B.A., LLB., - PRESIDENT   

    2) Smt. M.V.Bharathi                    

                                   B.Sc., LLB., -  MEMBER

                     3) Sri. Devakumar.M.C.                  

                                                          B.E., LLB.,    - MEMBER

Sri Devakumar.M.C.

Member

1.     The complainant has filed the complaint under section 12 of the C.P.Act, 1986, against the opposite party, alleging the deficiency in service and seeking refund of Rs.1,00,000/- along with interest and compensation for the mental agony, hardship with such other reliefs.
2.    The complainant has obtained a life insurance policy on 14.01.2008 and paid annual premium of Rs.50,000/- for two years.  The complainant requested the opposite party to close the policy and to refund the premium amount along with interest.  On failure to comply, in spite of repeated demands, the opposite party issued a reply notice on 14.07.2014, stating that it has paid the amount and same has been encashed.  The aggrieved complainant denying the same, has filed the complaint, alleging deficiency in service and seeking reliefs.
3.     The opposite party denying the allegations, pleaded that the complaint is barred by limitation and is liable to be dismissed on the same.  The complainant has obtained the policy agreeing to the terms and conditions of the policy.  The complainant become a defaulter, after two years of payment of premium, hence, the policy came to be lapsed and foreclosed for non-payment of the renewal premium amount and a foreclosure amount of Rs.56,797/- has been paid to the complainant, vide cheque dated 14.02.2012 bearing No.479481 and same got cleared by the complainant on 03.03.2012.  Hence, there is no nexus between the complainant and the opposite party.  There is no deficiency in service as alleged, hence, prays for dismissal of the complaint.
4.     To establish the facts, both parties filed affidavits in lieu of evidence and relied on several documents.  Written arguments filed by both side and heard the oral submission.  On perusing the material, the matter posted for orders.
5.     The points arose for our consideration are:-

1. Whether the complaint is maintainable?
2. Whether the complainant establishes the deficiency in service on the part of opposite party, in not refunding the premium amount deposited along with interest and thereby she is entitled for the reliefs sought?
3.  What order?

6.    Our findings on the aforesaid points are as follows:

Point No.1 :- In the affirmative.

Point No.2 :- Partly in the affirmative.

Point No.3 :- As per final order for the following

:: R E A S O N S ::

7.    Point No.1:- Admittedly, the complainant has obtained a life insurance policy from the opposite party, on payment of premium amount on 14.01.2008.  The complainant paid annual premium for a period of two years, later become defaulter.  The opposite party foreclosed the policy and paid Rs.56,792/- vide cheque dated 14.02.2012. 
8.    The complainant having obtained the policy and availed the services of opposite party considered as a consumer under section 2(1)(d), the allegations refers to the consumer dispute under section 2(1)(e) and the deficiency in service under section 2(1)(g).  Hence, the complaint is maintainable.  Accordingly, the point No.1 is answered in the affirmative.
9.    Point No.2:- The complainant has taken life insurance policy from opposite party on 14.01.2008 and paid annual premium of Rs.50,000/- for two years.  Owing to personal inconvenience could not pay the premium and requested the opposite party to cancel the policy and to refund the premium amount paid (i.e. Rs.1,00,000/-) with interest till date.  In spite of repeated requests, the opposite party failed to refund. A legal notice caused on to the opposite party on 14.07.2014.  The opposite party replied, stating the cheque bearing No.479481 dated 14.02.2012, has been sent to her and the same has been encashed.  The complainant has neither received the cheque nor encashed the same.  Hence, the complaint, alleging the deficiency in service and sought damages for the mental agony and hardship.
10. The opposite party contended that, the complaint is not maintainable as the same is barred by limitation.  The opposite party agreed the issuance of the life insurance policy and also the payment of premium amount for a period of two years.  The complainant failed to pay the policy renewal premium amount to avail the benefits of the policy.  As per the terms and conditions stipulated in the policy, if the policy came to be lapsed and foreclosed for non-payment of the premium amount. A sum of foreclosure amount of Rs.56,797/- has been paid to the complainant, through cheque bearing No.479481 dated 14.02.2012 and the same got encashed on 03.03.2012. As such, the nexus between the complainant has been concluded.  Hence, there is no deficiency in service by it, so contended it is not liable to pay any damages to the complainant and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
11. The complainant established the life insurance policy obtained from the opposite party on 14.01.2008 and paid annual premium of Rs.50,000/- for two years.  The opposite party also admitted the facts of issuance of the policy.  It is also established that, on failure to pay the policy renewal premium, the policy lapsed and as per terms and conditions of the policy, the opposite party foreclosed the policy.  However, the opposite party failed to place any evidence to establish the payment of Rs.56,797/- through cheque dated 14.02.2012 and the same got encashed.  The complainant’s bank passbook statement of account does not reflects the realization of the cheque amount and which supports the contention of the complainant relating to non-receipt of the cheque and the amount by opposite party.
12. In view of the above observations, we opine that the complainant has not received the policy foreclosure amount as contended by opposite party.  As such, the point No.2 is answered partly in the affirmative.
13.  Point No.3:- In view of the above observations, we proceed to pass the following

:: O R D E R ::

1. The complaint is allowed in part.
2. The opposite party is hereby directed to pay Rs.56,797/- along with interest at 18% p.a. on the entire amount from the date of foreclosure of the policy till the date of this order, to the complainant, within 60 days of this order.
3. In default to comply, the opposite party shall pay penalty of Rs.100/- per day, to the complainant until compliance.
4. The opposite party shall pay Rs.20,000/- compensation towards the deficiency in service, mental agony, hardship caused and Rs.2,000/- towards cost of the proceedings, to the complainant, within 60 days of this order.   On failure to pay, the opposite party shall pay interest at 12% p.a. on the said sum of Rs.22,000/-, to the complainant, until payment made.  
5. In case of default to comply this order, the opposite party shall undergo imprisonment and also liable for fine under section 27 of the C.P.Act, 1986.
6. Give the copies of this order to the parties, as per Rules.

(Dictated to the Stenographer transcribed, typed by her, transcript corrected by us and then pronounced in open court on this the 12^th August 2016)

                          (H.M.SHIVAKUMARA SWAMY) 

                                      PRESIDENT     

(M.V.BHARATHI)                           (DEVAKUMAR.M.C.)

      MEMBER                                         MEMBER