District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.
Consumer Complaint No.281/2021.
Date of Institution:01.06.2021
Date of Order:07.10.2022
Sanjay Yadav son of Shri Arjun Singh, resident of house NO. 656, Jawahar Colony, NIT, Faridabad, District Faridabad.
…….Complainant……..
Versus
M/s. Shri Ram Life Insurance Regd. Corporate Office: Ramky Scienimukm, Plot NO.s 31 & 32, Beside Andhra Bank Training Centre, Financial District, Gachibowli, Hyderabad – 500 032 through its Divisional Manager/Principal Officer.
…Opposite party……
Complaint under section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Now amended Section 34 of Consumer protection Act 2019.
BEFORE: Amit Arora……………..President
Mukesh Sharma…………Member.
Indira Bhadana…………Member.
PRESENT: Sh. L.K.Kaushik, counsel for the complainant.
Sh. Sanjeev Bansal, counsel for opposite party.
ORDER:
The facts in brief of the complaint are that the complainant obtained from the opposite party, the Shriram Life Assured Income Plan V03 for an amount of Rs..2,87,080/- vide insurance policy NO. NN012011118986 on 23.11.2020 for the complainant gave the premium amount of Rs.30,000/- to the opposite party at that time. At the time of obtaining the above said insurance policy, the complainant was fully assured by the opposite party that they would provide the loan to him, against the above said insurance policy. After believing their words the complainant obtained the above said insurance policy. Accordingly, the complainant approached the opposite party several times to sanction the loan for his personal use, but they always avoided it on one pretext or the other and did not sanction any loan amount to the complainant. Now the complainant was not more interested to continue his above said insurance policy with the opposite party. The complainant asked several times to the opposite party refund back the money already received by them, but the opposite parties always avoided it on one pretext or the other. The complainant sent legal notice dated 01.04.2021 to the opposite party but all in vain. The aforesaid act of opposite parties amounts to deficiency of service and hence the complaint. The complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite party to:
a) release the payment of Rs.30,000/- alongwith interest @ 24% p.a. from the date of its receipt till realization of whole amount.
b) pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .
c) pay Rs. 22,000 /-as litigation expenses.
2. Opposite party put in appearance through counsel and filed written statement wherein Opposite party refuted claim of the complainant and submitted that after underwriting the proposal, the opposite party insurance company issued a policy covering the life of Mr. Sanjay Yadav, he complainant herein vide policy NO.NN012011118986, under the plan “Shriram Life Assured Income Plan V03” for a sum assured amount of Rs.2,98,080/- for a term of 10 years with base annual renewal premium of Rs.28,708/- payable for a period of 10 years. Opposite party submitted that the policy sent to the policyholder was accompanied by a covering letter that clearly mentioned that in case the policy holder was not satisfied with the terms and conditions of the policy, he can withdraw/return the policy within fifteen days under the free look period. Further as per clause 4(i) of the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (Protection of policy holder’s interest) Regulation act, 2002, copy of proposal form was sent alongwith the policy documents to the policy holder. Opposite party submitted that as per IRDAI Regulations every policy had Free Look Cancellation clause. Free Look Cancellation was a clause where the policy holder on receiving the policy documents was having a liberty to look into the policy terms and conditions and for any reason if the policy holder was not satisfied with any of the policy terms and conditions then he may request in writing to the insurance company seeking for cancellation of the policy within 15 days time. The Insurance Company on receipt of FLC request, cancels the policy and refunds the premium after deducting stamp duty charges etc. In the instant case, the opposite party did not receive any complaints from the policyholder claiming any such cancellation within the FLC period. As such, it was presumed that the policyholder was satisfied with the
policy issued by the opposite party-insurance company and hence the complainant/policyholder was legally stopped form raising any objections under the policy as the same was not tenable in the eyes of law. The opposite party submitted that after 3 months from the date of receipt of the policy bond form the company, first time the complainant filed a complaint alongwith application for cancellation of the policy on 09.03.2021 by making all false allegations of mis-selling. It was submitted that on receipt of the said complaint, the same was sent to the internal department s for feedback and to know the veracity of the complaint; however in the meantime the complainant registered the complaint with the department of Financial Service Insurance Division vide registration NO.DEAID/E/2021/02863 dt.30.03.2021, which was duly replied by the opposite party on 12.04.2021 and sent the letter dated 12.04.2021 to the complainant by considering the request of the complainant for cancellation and also their company had initiated the process for refund of the premium through NEFT. It was submitted that, as agreed in the letter, the policy had been cancelled and the premium amount of Rs.30,000/- also refunded to the complainant’s account maintained in State Bank of India on 15.04.2021 through NEFT vide UTR No. N105211476012290. Opposite party denied rest of the allegations leveled in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3. The parties led evidence in support of their respective versions.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file.
5. In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against opposite party Shriram Life Insurance Company Ltd. with the prayer to: a) release the payment of Rs.30,000/- alongwith interest @ 24% p.a. from the date of its
receipt till realization of whole amount. b) pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment . c) pay Rs. 22,000 /-as litigation expenses.
Shri L.K.Kaushik, counsel for the complainant has made a statement that complaint alongwith documents already filed by him be read as the evidence of complainant. Accordingly, evidence on behalf of the complainant has been closed vide order dated 16.09.2022.
On the other hand counsel for the opposite party strongly agitated and
opposed. As per the evidence of the opposite party Ex.R/A – Shri I.E.Sridhar, General Manager , M/s. Shriram Life Insurance Company Ltd., Plot No. 31 & 32, 5th floor, Ramky Selenium, Beside Andhra Bank Training Centre, Financial District, Gachibowli, Hydrabad, Ex.R1 – proposal form, Ex.R-11 – policy documents (which contains first premium receipt, policy schedule & terms and conditions), Ex.R-111 – Application for cancellation of policy, Ex.R-Iv –letter dated 09.03.2021, Ex.R-V – letter dated 12,04.2021 in which it has been mention that we have accepted your accepted your request for policy cancellation and policy has also been cancelled, therefore, we will process for the refund through EFT at the earliest.
6. It is evident from Ex.R-V in which it has been mentioned that we have accepted your request for policy cancellation and policy has also been cancelled, therefore we will process for the refund through EFT at the earliest. As agreed in the letter, the policy had been cancelled and the premium amount of Rs.30,000/- also refunded to the complainant’s account maintained in State Bank of India on 15.04.2021 through NEFT vide UTR No. N105211476012290.
7. Keeping in view of the above, the Commission is of the opinion that no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party has been proved. Hence, the complaint is dismissed. Copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced on: 07.10.2022. (Amit Arora)
President
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Mukesh Sharma)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Indira Bhadana)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
