BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JALANDHAR.
Complaint No.198 of 2020
Date of Instt. 21.07.2020
Date of Decision: 19.02.2024
Kulwinder Singh S/o Sadhu Singh R/o Ittan Badhi, Bhogpur, Jalandhar.
..........Complainant
Versus
1. M/s Reliance Nippon Life insurance Co. Ltd., 3rd Floor, SCO-41, Pakhowal Road, Bhai Wala Chowk, Feroz Gandhi Market, Jila Kacheri Area, Model Gram, Ludhiana through its Manager/Authorized Officer.
2. M/s Reliance Nippon Life Insurance Co. Ltd., H-Block, 1st Floor, Dhirubai Ambani Knowledge City, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra- 400710 through its Managing Director/Principal Officer.
3. M/s Reliance Nippon Life insurance Co. Ltd., 4th Floor, City Square Building, Near Kesar Petrol Pump, G.T. Road, Jalandhar through its Manager/Authorized Officer.
4. Sh. Harbhal Singh, Agent, M/s Reliance Nippon Life Insurance Co. Ltd., 3rd Floor, SCO-41, Pakhowal Road, Bhai Wala Chowk, Feroz Gandhi Market, Jila Kacheri Area, Model Gram, Ludhiana.
….….. Opposite Parties
Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.
Before: Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj (President)
Smt. Jyotsna (Member) Sh. Jaswant Singh Dhillon (Member)
Present: Sh. A. K. Bhagat, Adv. Counsel for Complainant.
Sh. A. K. Gandhi, Adv. Counsel for OPs No.1 to 3.
OP No.4 withdrawn.
Order
Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj (President)
1. The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein it is alleged that the complainant took increasing income insurance plan from the OPs vide policy no.53588675 dated 30/10/2019. The complainant has paid Rs.1,04,999.52/- to the OPs as yearly premium on 30/10/2019 through cheque. The policy in question was taken at Jalandhar through the OP No.4 who is authorized agent of OPs No.1 to 3 and one post dated cheque and copy of Aadhar card given to the OP No.4 by the complainant on 25/10/2019 whereas the complainant did not sign any document/proposal form of insurance policy. At the time of taking the policy, OP No.4 provided wrong information to the complainant about the terms and conditions of the policy. The OP No.4 told the complainant that after the completion of 12 years, he will get guaranteed monthly income Rs 15,000/- per month and it will increase 25% approx after every year upto 24 years i.e. policy term. The OP No.4 did not tell the complainant that he has to pay regular premium for 12 years and the complainant was told that he can stop paying after one year. The OP No.4 further told the complainant that if he is not satisfied with the terms and conditions of the policy, then he can cancel the policy within 15 days i.e. free look period from the date of receiving original policy from the company and the amount will be refunded to the complainant by the opposite parties. Believing the OP No.4, the complainant took increasing income plan policy from the OPs and handed over one cheque and Aadhar card to the OP No.4. After taking policy, on 21/11/2019 the complainant received text message from the company of OPs on his registered mobile number that the policy pack has been delivered. Whereas the complainant has not received any policy pack prior to 02/12/2019. The complainant sent email to the opposite parties on 23/11/2019 regarding non delivery of policy pack and requested to send policy as far as possible. On 02/12/2019 the complainant received policy pack through registered post at his mailing address and he surprised to read the terms and conditions of the policy which are totally different as alleged by the OP No.4. Moreover the proposal form which is affixed on the policy pack is not signed by the complainant. At the time of taking policy, the complainant was not asked to sign on any document by the OP No.4. The complainant immediately submitted a letter for cancellation of policy along with original policy document kit on 09/12/2019 with the OP No.3 as wrong information explained to him by OP No.4 and said request duly acknowledged by the OPs and text massage was also sent on the registered mobile no of complainant by OPs. Thereafter the complainant has sent email on 19/12/2019 to Sr. Executive-Grievance Redressal of OPs for the cancellation of policy no.53588675 and the refund of premium amount i.e. Rs.1,04,999/-. But in reply of said email, Grievance Redressal of OPs sent email to the complainant on 21/12/2019 and did not cancel the policy of complainant and further intimated that request for cancellation of policy made by him on 09/12/2019 beyond the free look period i.e. 15 days as policy has been dispatched by OPs on 02/11/2019. Apart from this, the correspondence were made between the complainant and Grievances Redressal of OPs through emails and the complainant sent proof of receiving policy pack which was duly issued by Indian postal department and the same was acknowledged by grievance redressal of opposite parties, but still they did not accept the request of complainant. The complainant received original policy pack kit on 02/12/2019 from the OPs. As per sub-clause 16 of 6..Part F the terms and conditions of policy, if the policy is lost or misplaced then the policyholder made written request with reason to the company, if the company is satisfy with the reason then duplicate policy document will be issued and original document automatically cease to have any validity. But nothing like this has been done in the present case. Moreover, the complainant received original policy pack kit on 02/12/2019. OPs are creating false story and reasons just to avoid payment of premium amount i.e. Rs.1,04,999/- and refusing to accept the request for cancellation of policy is totally false arbitrarily, baseless, illegal and against the law. The OPs declined the request of complainant on useless grounds without giving any reason and proof and just to avoid refund of premium amount. Thereafter, the OPs were got served with the Legal Notice dated 14/05/2020 through registered post, but all in vain and as such, necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OPs be directed to pay claim amount to the tune of Rs.1,04,999/- to the complainant alongwith interest. Further, OPs be directed to pay a compensation of Rs.50,000/- for causing mental tension and harassment to the complainant and Rs.25,000/- as litigation expenses.
2. Notice of the complaint was sent to the OPs and accordingly, OPs No.1 to 3 appeared through its counsel and filed written reply and contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the complaint being frivolous and vexatious is liable to be dismissed with costs as the complainant has failed to make out a case of Deficiency of Service as alleged or otherwise within the meaning of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, hence the present complaint is not maintainable. It is further averred that the complainant has concealed and has suppressed the material and relevant facts of the case. The complaint has been filed with malafide and dishonest intention and complainant has not only concealed the material facts from the Commission, but has also twisted and distorted the same to suit his own convenience and to mislead this Commission. It is further averred that the complainant with malafide did not disclose the true and correct facts before this Commission and file the false complaint only to get undue benefit at the cost of company. The present complaint is clear cut misuse of the Consumer Protection Act. It is further averred that the complaint is devoid of any material particulars and has been filed merely to harass and gain undue advantage and unjustified monies from the OPs and hence the complaint deserves to be dismissed in limini. It is further averred that the complaint has been filed with ulterior motive and malafide intention to cause harassment and prejudice to the OPs which is company of high repute. On merits, it is admitted that the complainant purchased income insurance plan from the OPs, vide Policy No.53588675 on 30.10.2019 and it is also admitted that the premium was paid by the complainant, but the other allegations as made in the complaint are categorically denied and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits, the same may be dismissed.
3. The OP No.4 withdrawn by the complainant vide his separate statement dated 10.03.2021.
4. Rejoinder to the written statement filed by the complainant, whereby reasserted the entire facts as narrated in the complaint and denied the allegations raised in the written statement.
5. In order to prove their respective versions, both the parties have produced on the file their respective evidence.
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and have also gone through the case file very minutely.
7. The complainant has alleged in complaint that the complainant purchased income insurance plan from the OPs vide Policy No.53588675 on 30.10.2019. It is also admitted that the premium was paid by the complainant. The policy has been proved as Ex.C-3. The complainant has alleged the at the time of taking policy he was informed that he was to pay the premium only for one year and he was never informed that the premium was to be paid regularly for 12 years, whereas he was told that he can stop payment after one year. He was assured that she will get monthly income Rs.15,000/- per month and it will increase 25% approximately after every year upto 24 years i.e. policy term. This fact has been denied by the OP that he was ever misrepresented by the OPs or their agents rather they have clarified that the complainant was to pay the premium every year.
8. The complainant has alleged that when he did not receive the policy documents, he sent an email on 19.12.2019 informing the OPs that the policy documents relating to policy have not been received. He has alleged that he received the document on 02.12.2019 and found that he is to pay the premium for every year. He sent a letter for cancellation of the policy alongwith original policy document kit on 09.12.2019. He has proved on record the emails Ex.C-2, Ex.C-4 and Ex.C-5 to Ex.C-7. The complainant has alleged that he received message that the policy was dispatched and delivered, but he never received the policy, rather he received the policy when he made a request. He has referred the document Ex.C-7 to show that the article was delivered to her on 02.12.2019. The complainant has proved on record the legal notice given to the OPs.
9. Perusal of Ex.C-1 shows that the policy No.53588675 was dispatched on 05.11.2019 vide AWB No.EA740929606IN and the same was delivered to him on 15.11.2019, but this fact has been denied by the complainant. The complainant has also relied upon the messages Ex.C-4 showing that his cancellation request has been registered on 09.12.2019, but this is with regard to policy No.53588771 and not 53588675. Perusal of Ex.C-6 shows that the email was sent to the complainant informing that the policy No.53588675 was issued and the policy documents duly signed proposal form have been dispatched to the complainant on his email address on 02.11.2019 and booked on 05.11.2019. The complainant has alleged that on his email dated 09.12.2019, the documents were supplied to him and he made request for cancellation within time. As per Ex.R5, the message relied upon by the complainant Ex.C-1 shows the email detail for EA No.740929606IN and the delivery of the item was confirmed on 15.11.2019 at 09:37:29. The document and the time alleged by the complainant vide which he allegedly received the item is dated 09.12.2019 and this also shows the policy No.53588675 and the item was delivered on 09.12.2019. Both the Ex.R-5 and Ex.R-6 and Ex.C-7 are relating to the complainant on the same address and the same delivery location. The complainant has alleged that he did not make the cancellation request within 15 days as per the terms and conditions as he did not get the same on 15.11.2019, but his contention is not tenable as the delivery has been confirmed and within 15 days, he was to get cancelled the policy documents, if he was not satisfied. Even if for the sake of arguments, it is assumed that he did not get the documents, but he has himself admitted that he got the message about the delivery of the article on 15.11.2019, but he did not immediately inform the OPs about the non-delivery of the documents. If the documents delivered on 15.11.2019, then he would have received the message within 2 or 3 days, but he sent the email after 15 days of the message received by the complainant. He has not produced the copies of emails from 21.11.2019 till 23.11.2019 to prove that he never received any emails as alleged by the OPs. The complainant has concealed the factum of receiving the documents and has violated the terms and conditions of policy. He did not get the policy cancelled within 15 days as per policy. Thus, the complaint is not entitled for the relief and the complaint of the complainant is without merit and the same is dismissed with no order of costs. Parties will bear their own costs. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.
10. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.
Dated Jaswant Singh Dhillon Jyotsna Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj
19.02.2024 Member Member President
