Gariahat Road, Kolkata-19.

3)                   Mrs. Anta Chadda (Met Life Employee No.1040719),

C/o.  Met Life Insurance Co. Ltd.,

Gariahat Road, Kolkata-19.                                                                     _____ Opposite Parties

Present :           Sri Sankar Nath Das, President.

                        Dr. Subir Kumar Chaudhuri, Member.

Order No.   11    Dated  21-01-2014.

            We have gone through the pleadings of the parties, evidence and documents in particular and we find that complainants are the residents of Kolkata and complainant no.1 is suffering from acute disabled condition owing to a Burn-Stem Stroke and confined into the bed and unable to move without help.  O.p. no.3 sometimes in January 2009 approached the complainants and offered for an insurance policy with Met Life India Insurance Co. Ltd. with insurance coverage and medical coverage with one time payment of Rs.2 lakhs only. Complainant on good faith paid a sum of Rs.2 lakhs with Application No.127954052 and handed over a cheque of Rs.2 lakhs towards one time premium against the said policy. O.p. no.3 is an employee of the said o.p. no.1 and posted at Kolkata Branch Met No. is 1040719.

            All of a sudden o.p. no.1 issued a demand notice praying inter alia for further premium of Rs.2 lakhs payable by 9.1.10 and further found that o.p. company completed a fake medical report from D.G. Medicals of 7A, Bijoy Ghosh Street, Kolkata-32. Immediately thereafter complainant no.2 talked with o.p. no.3 and alleged about second premium by pointing out that the condition of payment was one time payment and subsequent payment is not payable by complainants. O.p. no.3 brought one Mahesh Kumar Sharma alleged to have been the representative of o.p. no.1 who tried to clarify the condition of the demand made by the company.

            O.ps. then to substantiate their claim received the proposal of the company wherefrom it is found that there was no signature of the complainant nos.1 or 2 on t he policy and the medical certificate dt.6.1.09 was prepared practicing fraud and the certificate issued by o.p. no.1 is not a genuine one. Mr. Bengani never went for a medical examination. Complainants thereafter consulted with lawyer and ld. advocate on 13.1.12 and sent his notice with a demand for refunding the entire amount with interest and damages as o.p. neither confirmed the notice nor regularize policy in its legal form. Ld. advocate of the complainants by notice dt.29.6.12 further prayed for cancellation of alleged policy and refund of the entire premium with interest but of no reply. Hence the case was filed by the complainant with the prayer contained in the petition of complaint.

            O.ps. did not contest the case by filing w/v and matter was heard ex parte against the o.ps.

Decision with reasons:

            In view of the findings above and on perusal of the entire materials on record we find that the complainants have proved their case and the contentions of the complainants have not been rebutted by o.ps. since the matter has been heard ex parte against all o.ps. and we hold that o.ps. had sufficient deficiencies on their part being service providers to their consumers / complainants and  the complainants are entitled to relief.

            Hence, ordered,

            That the case is allowed ex parte with cost against the o.ps. O.ps. are jointly and/or severally directed to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs) only towards payment of premium and are further directed to pay to the complainant compensation of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand) only for harassment and mental agony and litigation cost of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) only within 45 days from the date of communication of this order, i.d. an interest @ 10% p.a. shall accrue over the entire sum due to the credit of the complainant till full realization.