Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/456/2014

Anil Gautam - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Aviva Life Insurance Company India Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Ajmer Lal Pundeer, Adv.

27 Jan 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II, U.T. CHANDIGARH

======

Consumer Complaint  No	:	456 of 2014
Date  of  Institution	:	3.9.2014
Date   of   Decision	:	27.1.2016

 

 

 

 

 

Anil Gautam R/o #No.1047/B, Gobindpura, Manimajra (UT), Chandigarh.

                …..Complainant

Versus

 

1. M/s Aviva Life Insurance Co. India Ltd. SCO 18-182, Sector 9, Chandigarh (UT) through its Branch Manager.
2. M/s Aviva Life Insurance Company India Ltd. Aviva Tower, Sector Road, Opp-Gold Course, DLF-Phase V, Sector 43, Gurgaon 122 003 (Haryana) through its Chairman Cum Managing Director.

 

….. Opposite Parties

 

BEFORE:  SH.RAJAN DEWAN                 PRESIDENT

         SH.JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU       MEMBER

         MRS.PRITI MALHOTRA             MEMBER

 

 

For complainant(s)      :     Sh. A.L. Pundeer, Advocate  

 

For Opposite Parties    :     Sh. Gaurav Bhardwaj, Advocate.       

 

 

PER PRITI MALHOTRA, MEMBER

 

 

          As per the case, the complainant purchased an insurance product namely “AVIVA DHAN VRIDHI” from Opposite Party No.1 having policy No.TDW3157673 commencing from 24.3.2011 for sum assured Rs 7.00 lac for a policy term of 14 years covering life of the complainant and that was to be matured on 11.5.2026. The complainant  paid advance  premium of Rs.79,527/-.  It is alleged that no policy bond was delivered to the complainant by the OPs. On 24.4.2012 the complainant received a telephonic message from the office of Opposite Party No.1 for payment of 2^nd annual installment. The complainant asked it to send their representative accordingly the insurance agent collected a cheque dated 25.4.2012 of Rs.79,568/- towards the second premium of the policy in question. But to the utter surprise of the complainant the OPs vide letter dated 25.4.2012 sent a new proposal wherein his wife was life insured seeking confirmation of the complainant, which was never asked for by them. It is alleged that the OPs used the amount of 2^nd installment for issue of fresh proposal to promote new business by some mischievous agent with connivance with the official/officer of the OPs by using unfair trade practice. The complainant lodged the complaint in this regard with AVIVA Insurance vide Anenxure C-8 but nothing fruitful came out.  It is further alleged that despite best efforts the OPs have neither cancelled the proposal of Mrs. Anu Gautam nor adjusted the premium against 2^nd installment of policy of the complainant till date as result whereof both payments of premium had become futile as policy lapsed as per record of the AVIVA Insurane books and thus looses both payments for no fault on his part.  When all the efforts of the complainant failed the complainant sent legal notice dated 9.7.2014 to the Opposite Parties but to no avail. Alleging the said act of OPs as deficiency in service, this compliant has been filed.

 

2.     Opposite Parties have filed reply and stated that the complaint is barred by time as the same has been filed after lapse of two years and 4 months from the date of investment. It is stated that the OPs issued two separate policies i.e. policy No. TDW3157673 issued on 11.5.2012,  wherein the wife of the complainant Ms. Anu Gautam was assured. Whereas policy bearing No.TDW3080881  issued on 31.3.2011 was in the name of the complainant.  However, the complainant concealed this material fact from this Forum. The complainant was duly supplied policy documents and he was fully aware of the terms and conditions thereof.  Due to non receipt of premium amount both the policies were lapsed as per terms and conditions. It is denied that the Opposite Parties received second premium installment for the policy bearing No. TDW3157673 on 25.4.2011 because the said policy commenced on 11.5.2012 so demand of second premium did not arise at all.  It is denied that the complainant ever requested for  cancellation of the policy in question. In fact the policy in question lapsed due non payment of premium. Pleading no deficiency in service and denying rest of the allegations, it is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.
3.     The Complainant also filed rejoinder thereby reiterating the averments as made in complaint and controverting that of the Opposite Parties in the reply.
4.     Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.
5.     We have heard the ld. Counsel for the parties and have also perused the record.
6.     Out of the jumbled facts pleaded by the complainant in his complaint as well from the written statement of the OPs and rejoinder filed by the complainant, it is  clear that the complainant purchased “AVIVA Dhan Vridhi” policy bearing No. TDW 3080881 dated 31.3.2011 for policy term of 19 years against the premium of Rs.79,527/- paid as first installment. It transpires from the record that cheque No.552369 dated 22.4.2012 in the sum of Rs.79,525/- issued by the complainant towards the second installment of premium for the policy obtained by the complainant as mentioned above from the Opposite Parties was adjusted by the Opposite Parties in a way that they issued a fresh policy No.TDW3157673 in favour of the wife of the complainant. i.e. Ms. Anu Gautam, which was never intended and applied/proposed for by the complainant.
7.          The allegation of the complainant in regard to issuance of the never applied for policy in favour of his wife by utilizing the renewal premium paid through cheque towards 2^nd premium of policy No. TDW 3080881 is cogently established on record. The perusal of the so called proposal form filled and signed by the wife of the complainant Annexure R-2 and appended documents from page 29 to 33 reveals that the OPs had manipulated it by making certain cuttings regarding the dates mentioned therein at various pages to overshadow their arbitrariness for wrongly issuing a fresh policy instead of adjusting the premium paid for IInd installment against the policy issued to the complainant. In addition to this the photographs affixed on the said proposal form (Annexure R-2) of Anu Gautam (wife of the complainant) the alleged insured  and the alleged nominee Anil Gautam (i.e. the complainant)are not actually of the respective persons and are of different persons. This fact has duly been clarified by the photos affixed on Annexure C-7 and C-6 i.e. Aadhaar card and PAN card respectively of Mrs. Anu Gautam and Anil Gautam.
8.     The stand taken by the OPs that the policy in the name of Anu Gautam i.e. the wife of the complainant was issued against the proposal form duly filled  is of no basis as the alleged policy bearing. No.TDW3157673 is having commencement date as 11.5.2012 which is in contradiction to the letter dated 25.4.2012 (Annexure C-4) where they sought clarification for proposal No. NUP14939376 i.e. for policy No.TDW3157673 from the complainant.  For the sake of convenience the relevant contents of the same are reproduced as under:-

“we would like to confirm that we have received your proposal and as a part of processing we have been trying to reach you on the telephone number given on the proposal form for verification of some details. This is a requirement prior to issuance of the above mentioned proposal No. NUP14939376.

We are keen to issue your policy at the earliest and look forward to your call back on 1800 180 2266 to complete the verification.

In case we are unable to contact you or do not hear from you by 5/9/2012 to complete the pre-issuance verification, this proposal will be cancelled and your money will be refunded (subject to realization of the same)”

 

9.     It is realized from the above that the OPs were supposed to wait till 5.9.2012 in case all the verifications are completed in respect of new policy. From the copies of the letters dated 30.6.2012 Annexure C-8 and 5^th July 2012 (Annexure C-9) issued by the OPs fortifies that the complainant duly registered his dispute qua the policy in dispute bearing No.TDW3157673, which OPs failed to redress his grievance. It is quite apparent on record that the OPs  arbitrarily issued Policy No.TDW3157673 commencing from 11.5.2012 in favour of spouse of the complainant namely Anu Gautam, which was never asked for or applied for. The tabulated form bearing details of the policy NO. TDW3157673 so mentioned in the written statement of the Opposite Party shows that the premium amount for the alleged policy was for Rs.79,568/- whereas  the cheque amounting to Rs.79,525/- dated 22.4.2012 was debited in account of the complainant on 11.5.2012. No where they demanded the difference of the premium amount from the complainant or from his spouse. The said cheque kept lying with OPs since 22.4.2012 till it was encashed on 11.5.2012. This further strengthens that the said cheque was duly issued for the 2^nd installment against policy No. TDW 3080881 obtained by the complainant, which commenced on 31.3.2011. As such it is proved that there is gross deficiency in rendering service on the part of the Opposite Parties and also proved their indulged in gross unfair trade practice.
10.          The complainant invested his money with the OPs in utmost good faith but they breached the trust of the complainant by converting the amount paid by the complainant towards second premium of his policy for issuing new policy in his wife’s name by manipulating things.  Mutual faith which is an essence of any insurance contract has been betrayed by the OPs. Our view is supported with the principle of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in United India Insurance Co Ltd. vs. M.K.J Corporation, 1998(2) CLT 489 and M/s Modern Insulators Ltd. Vs. M/s Oriental Ins. Co. Ltd. 2000 (1) CLT 615. As such the complainant has rightly stated that he has no faith in the Opposite Parties company and had rightly sought refund of his invested amount.
11.     In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that the complaint deserves to be allowed.  Accordingly, the complaint is allowed and the Opposite Parties are jointly & severally directed as under:-

        

a]  To refund Rs.1,59,052/- (i.e. 79,527/- and Rs.79,525/) the amount invested by the complainant with the OPs with interest @9% p.a. from the date of respective dates of its deposit till realization,

 

b]  To pay Rs.20,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and physical harassment to the complainant on account of deficiency in service as well as indulgence into unfair trade practice.

C]  To pay Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses.

 

         The above said order shall be complied with by the Opposite Parties within 45 days of its receipt, failing which they shall be liable to pay interest on the above amounts awarded at (a) at (b) at the rate of 12% p.a. from the date of this order till it is paid, besides paying litigation expenses. 

 

         The certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of charge, after which the file be consigned.

Announced

27.1.2016

                                                                                       Sd/-

 (RAJAN DEWAN)

PRESIDENT

 

Sd/-

 (JASWINDER SINGH SIDHU)

MEMBER

 

 

Sd/-

(PRITI MALHOTRA)

MEMBER

ter-spacing:1.0pt'>PRESIDING MEMBER

 

 

Sd/-

 (SURESH KUMAR SARDANA)

MEMBER