Haryana

Kurukshetra

236/2018

Suresh Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

Max Life Ins - Opp.Party(s)

Deepak Sethi

05 Jan 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL  COMMISSION, KURUKSHETRA.

 

Complaint No.236 of 2018

Date of Instt.:12.11.2018

Date of Decision:05.01.2022

 

Suresh Kumar resident of house No.935/5A, Durga Devi Mandir, Piipli, Tehsil Thanesar, District Kurukshetra.

                                                        …….Complainant.                                                            Versus

 

q.Max Life Insurance Co. Limited Plot ANo.90A, Sector  18, Gurugram, Haryana -122015  through its Managing Director.

2.Max Life Insurance Co. Limited, Sector 17, SCO -7, and 8, District Kurukshetra, through its Branch Manager.

3.Axis Bank Limited, Ground Floor, Ladwa Road, near Shankar Colony, village Bir Pipli, Tehsil Thanesar, District Kurukshetra Haryana 136131 through its Branch Manager.

                ….…Opposite parties.

 

                Complaint under Section  12 of Consumer Protection Act.

 

Before       Smt. Neelam Kashyap, President.    

                   Shri Issam Singh Sagwal, Member.

                   Ms.Neelam Member.

                 

Present:     Sh.Deepak Sethi Advocate for the complainant.

                 Sh.Rajesh Kaushik Advocate for the OP No.1 and 2.

                 Sh.Rohtash Jangam Advocate for the OP No.3.

 

 

                 This is a complaint under Section 12  of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 moved by Suresh Kumar   against Max Life Insurance Co. etc -the opposite parties.

 

2.             The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant   was convinced by the OP No.3 and upon that he took policy bearing No.135430387 from the OP NO.1 and 2 namely Max Life Monthly Income Advantage Plan commencing from 20.3.2017  and paid the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- for the said purpose. At that time Ops assured the complainant that the complainant is free  either to continue with the policy or not.  The sum assured under the said policy was Rs.8,63,426/- and the annual premium installment for the said policy is Rs.50,001/-. At the time of the issuance of the said policy, Ops assured the complainant that the policy is very beneficial one and he will get handsome profit from the said policy.  The policy was stated to be under the need of premiums for five years whereas the premium payment  term if mentioned as 15 years. The terms and conditions of the policy were orally told to the complainant.. The complainant discussed the terms and conditions of the policy with his friends and  expressed his interest  not to continue with the policy and requested the OP no.2 to refund the amount so paid alongwith interest and the OP No.2 promised refund the amount of premium alongwith interest. It is further stated that on 25.5.2018 the complainant received a letter via e-mail from the Head office of OP No.1 and 2 and in the said letter the complainant was provided  with an offer of free look period of fifteen days either to adopt to continue with the policy or  to surrender the same  and the premium so paid was assured to be refunded back to the complainant.  Thereafter, as per correspondence between  the complainant and Ops, the complainant was asked to deposit the original policy, cancelled cheque in the office of OP No.2 and the complainant did the needful but the complainant was not refunded the amount despite various correspondence through e-mails between the complainant and OP No.1 and 2 and service of legal notice dated 12.7.2018 which amounts to deficiency in services on the part of the Ops.  Thus, the complainant has filed the present complaint alleging deficiency in services on the part of the Ops and prayed that the Ops be directed to refund the sum of Rs.1.00 lacs alongwith interest and compensation for the mental harassment caused to him and the litigation expenses.

3.             Notice of the complaint was given to the Ops. OP No.1 and 2 appeared and filed written statement disputing the claim of the complainant. It is submitted that the policy namely Max Life Monthly Income Advantage Plan 15-Pay with annual premium of Rs.50,101/-  was purchased by the complainant. The complainant submitted the proposal form on  20.3.2017 and on receipt of the proposal form from the  complainant, the policy No.135430387 was issued to the complainant by the answering Ops under the said plan and the said policy was delivered to the complainant on 31.3.2017 by speed post vide dispatch No.EH570308401 IN. Free look period of 15 days was provided to the complainant from the date of receipt of the policy and during this free look period, the complainant was at liberty to review the terms and conditions of the policy, where if the complainant was disagreed to any of the terms and conditions, he was having option to return the policy stating the reasons for the objections. It was made clear to the complainant that upon return, the policy will be terminated forthwith and all rights, benefits and interest under the policy will be  ceased immediately. It was further made clear that the complainant shall be entitled to a refund of the premium received by the Ops after deducting  the  proportionate risk premium for the period of cover, charges and stamp duty  paid and the expenses incurred by the company on medical examination, if any. It is further submitted that during this free look period of 15 days, the complainant has failed to raise any kind of objection and due to non receipt of any objections at the end of the complainant.  It is further submitted that the OP received the letter dated 25..4.2018 for the reduction in the sum assured and on 9.5.2018, the revert letter was sent to the complainant on the same day i.e. 9.5.2018 and the complainant again requested for reduction of  sum assured and the same was also reverted back.  On 1.06.2018, the complainant requested for free look cancellation. Vide letter dated 11.6.2018, the customer complaint for misspelling the policy of insurance and requested for  cancellation of the policy insurance.  Receipt of the legal notice has also been admitted by the Ops.  Thus, it is submitted that there is no deficiency in services on the part of the Ops and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint.    

 

4.             The OP No.3 appeared and filed written statement disputing the claim of the complainant.  It is submitted that the contract of insurance was between the  Insurance company i.e. Max Life Insurance Company Limited and the complainant and the answering OP is no where in the picture of the said contract. The role of the bank i.e OP No.3 is that of role of corporate agent/facilitator. It is submitted that the present complaint against the OP No.3 has been filed only to harass the answering OP No.3. The bank has no legal liability to pay any claim to the complainant. However, the insurance company has liability to pay the claim if any. The complainant accepted the insurance policy after understanding all its terms and conditions. As per terms and conditions of the policy, there was free look period of 15 days in which the complainant had option to refund the 8insurance policy, but the complainant did not availed benefit of free look period, provided to him. All other allegations made in the complaint have been denied by the answering OP and it was submitted that there is no deficiency in services on the part of the OP No.3 and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint.

 

5.             The complainant in support of his case has filed affidavit Ex.CW1/A and tendered documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-13 and closed his evidence.

 

6.             On the other hand ,OP No.1 and 2 in support of their case have filed affidavit Ex.RW1/A and tendered documents Ex.R-1 to Ex.R-4 and closed their evidence.

 

7.             The OP No.3 in its evidence has filed document Ex.R-5 and closed its evidence.

 

8.             We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the material available on the case file.

 

9.             The learned counsel for the complainant while reiterating the averments made in the complaint has argued that took policy bearing No.135430387 from the OP NO.1 and 2 namely Max Life Monthly Income Advantage Plan commencing from 20.3.2017  and paid the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- for the said purpose. At that time Ops assured the complainant that the complainant is free either to continue with the policy or not.  The sum assured under the said policy was Rs.8,63,426/- and the annual premium installment for the said policy is Rs.50,001/-.  The policy was stated to be under the need of premiums for five years whereas the premium payment  term if mentioned as 15 years. The terms and conditions of the policy were orally told to the complainant. It is further argued that on 25.5.2018 the complainant received a letter via e-mail from the Head office of OP No.1 and 2 and in the said letter the complainant was provided  with an offer of free look period of fifteen days either to adopt to continue with the policy or  to surrender the same  and the premium so paid was assured to be refunded back to the complainant.  Thereafter, as per correspondence between  the complainant and Ops, the complainant was asked to deposit the original policy, cancelled cheque in the office of OP No.2 and the complainant did the needful but the complainant was not refunded the amount despite various correspondence through e-mails between the complainant and OP No.1 and 2 and service of legal notice dated 12.7.2018 which amounts to deficiency in services on the part of the Ops.  Thus, the complainant has filed the present complaint alleging deficiency in services on the part of the Ops.

 

10.                    OP the other hand, the learned counsel for the Ops while reiterating the submissions made in the written statement has argued that that the policy namely Max Life Monthly Income Advantage Plan 15-Pay with annual premium of Rs.50,101/-  was purchased by the complainant. The complainant submitted the proposal form on  20.3.2017 and on receipt of the proposal form from the  complainant, the policy No.135430387 was issued to the complainant by the answering Ops under the said plan and the said policy was delivered to the complainant on 31.3.2017 by speed post vide dispatch No.EH570308401 IN. Free look period of 15 days was provided to the complainant from the date of receipt of the policy and during this free look period, the complainant was at liberty to review the terms and conditions of the policy, where if the complainant was disagreed to any of the terms and conditions, he was having option to return the policy stating the reasons for the objections. It was made clear to the complainant that upon return, the policy will be terminated forthwith and all rights, benefits and interest under the policy will be  ceased immediately. It was further argued that the complainant shall be entitled to a refund of the premium received by the Ops after deducting  the  proportionate risk premium for the period of cover, charges and stamp duty  paid and the expenses incurred by the company on medical examination, if any. It is further submitted that during this free look period of 15 days, the complainant has failed to raise any kind of objection and due to non receipt of any objections at the end of the complainant.  It is further submitted that the OP received the letter dated 25..4.2018 for the reduction in the sum assured and on 9.5.2018, the revert letter was sent to the complainant on the same day i.e. 9.5.2018 and the complainant again requested for reduction of  sum assured and the same was also reverted back.  On 1.06.2018, the complainant requested for free look cancellation. Vide letter dated 11.6.2018, the customer complaint for misspelling the policy of insurance and requested for cancellation of the policy insurance.  Receipt of the legal notice has also been admitted by the Ops.

 

11.            The  Learned counsel for the Ops has placed  on the file mark “J” and argued that vide Mark “J” the policy  in question was delivered to the complainant on 31.3.2021  as shown in the  Mark “J and date of commencement of the policy was 20.3.2017 as shown at page no.4 of  Ex.C-1 and thereafter the complainant applied for reduction in the premium of the policy and the same was allowed. He has argued that vide page 3 of Ex.C-1 the said welcome letter was written on reduction of the installments and this is not the letter of issuing original policy. But we do not see any merit in the said argument because in the letter Ex.C-1 at page 3 it is no where written that this letter is written on reduction of premium amount on the installments of the policy. The page 3  of Ex.C-1 shows that the policy was conveyed to the complainant only on 25.5.2018.  In pursuance of the above offer, the complainant surrendered the policy and the complainant was asked to deposit the original policy and cancelled cheque etc.  Therefore, the complainant surrendered the policy within the free look period and thus he is entitled to the amount deposited by him with the Ops i.e. Rs.1,00,000/-. Therefore, the complaint filed by the complainant succeeds. However, no deficiency in services is made out against OP no.3.

 

12.            In view of the above findings and observations, we accept the present complaint and direct the Ops to refund the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 6%  per annum from the date of this order i.e. 5.01.2022 till its actual realization. The complainant shall also be entitled to a sum of Rs.10,000/-  in lump sum as compensation for the mental agony and harassment caused to him and the litigation expenses. The Ops are further directed to make the compliance of this order within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order failing which the complainant shall be at liberty to initiate proceedings u/s 25/27 of the Consumer Protection Act. However, complaint against OP No.3 stands dismissed.  A certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties concerned as per rules and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

 

Announced in the open Commission.

Dated: 05.01.2022.                                                      President.

 

 

                        Member                     Member.