Delhi

New Delhi

CC/490/2010

Devender Kumar Bhuranda - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. Aviva Life Insurance Company Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

17 Sep 2019

ORDER

 

 

                               CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

                  (DISTT. NEW DELHI), ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR,

                   VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

              NEW DELHI-110002.

 

 

          CC. No./490/2010                                                                                    Dated:

           In the matter of:-

         Sh. Devender Kumar Bhuranda            

         S/o Sheri Daya Nand

        R/o 93- A, DDA Flats

       Ghazipur, Delhi                              

     …..Complainant

Versus

1.       Aviva Life Insurance 

               5^th Floor, JMD Regent Square,

                Gurgaon Mehrauli Road,

                  Branch office at:

Branch Office at:

Prakash Deep Building,

7, Tolstoy Marg, 2^nd Floor,

Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001

 

2.   HDFC Bank

NRI Colony, Alaknanda Apartments,

Greater Kailash-II, New Delhi.

Previously : Centurian Bank of Punjab Ltd.,

Through Mrs. Kulpreet Kaur (Manager)

 

3.           Shri Suneet Singh

(Public Relationship Manager )

HDFC Bank, NRI Colony, GK-II,

New Delhi.

 

 

 

4. Shri Amit Khandelwal – FPC

Branch Officeat:

Prakash Deep Building,

7, Tolstoy Marg, 2^nd Floor,

Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001

                                                                                                             .…… Opposite Parties

                       

 

                                                        ORDER

By way of this order, we are disposing off the application u/s 340 CrPC filed on behalf of complainant against OP-1.

 

Briefly, as per order of predecessor bench of this Forum dated 31/01/2013, OP-1 was directed to refund 75,000/- alongwith 6% interest of Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for harassment including  litigation cost. This order was challenged by complainant in the State Commission and vide order dated 31/03/2017 it affirmed this order, however, gave direction to the District Forum to dispose of the application of complainant u/s 340 CrPC, which was not decided by predecessor bench of this Forum in its order dated  31/01/2013 while disposing of the the original complaint.

As per this application, OP-1 has filed policy documents, power of attorney, proposal form, Key feature documents, Copy of policy schedule, Customer declaration. It is submitted that the OP is guilty of concealment and misappropriation of proceedings u/s 340 CrPC for filing false and fabricated documents in order to mislead the Forum.

The OP-1 stated that the value of said policy was calculated at Rs. 32,566/- and OP sent letter with cheque for a sum of Rs. 32,279/- on behalf of this policy. It is further alleged that complainant was cheated as there was no document 7.43 in the policy article.

It is also submitted that para 15.3 is different from the original policy and clause no. 15.4 and 15.5 are also different, clause 15.6 is missing document. It is prayed that OP-1 has committed perjury and it should be proceeded u/s 340 CrPC. Per Contra, OP-1 stated that the application of the complainant is barred principle of Rejudicata, as the complainant filed criminal complaint before the Metropolitan Magistrate which was dismissed by him vide order dated 01/05/2015, its revision was also dismissed on 30/01/2016 by Ld. ASJ, Delhi.

This revision petition was challenged in Hon’ble High Court and Hon’ble High Court vide its order dated 28/10/2014 in case no. CRL.M.C.2116/2013 dismissed the same  implying there by that it upheld the orders of the subordinate courts.

The Forum has perused the file, This application for perjury was filed before predecessor bench of this Forum in December, 2011. The complaint was disposed of on 31/01/2013 and the complaint before the Metropolitan Magistrate was filed in 2012. This makes it amply clear that the application for perjury as well as the complaint for prosecution u/s CrPC were filed at similar periods. As already stated, the complaint u/s 200 CrPC was dismissed by the Metropolitan Magistrate. However, the complainant tried to argue that the complaint was filed before Metropolitan Magistrate was for in personal capacity. The application before this Forum was the perjury committed by the complainant beforea the Forum.

After considering all the facts of this case as well as the different orders placed on record, the Forum is of the view that the application for perjury is not maintainable. Firstly, on the ground that the District Forum passed order dated 13/01/2013, considering all the aspect of the case as well as documents placed  by both the parties on record and gave the final verdict. The present Forum if it decides the application of the complainant then it tantamount to review of the order passed by predecessor bench of this Forum. Secondly, the application cannot be entertained by this Forum as the court of proper jurisdiction i.e. Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi has already dismissed the complaint of the complainant against OP-1 and moreover the order of Metropolitan Magistrate has attained finally up to Hon’ble High Court of Delhi on the similar facts.

           In view of above, the application is dismissed with no order as to cost.

This order be sent to server (www.confonet.nic.in ). A copy of this order be   sent to the complainant free of cost by post.

          Pronounced in open Forum on 17/09/2019

            File be consigned to Record Room.

 

 

                                                              (ARUN KUMAR ARYA)

                        PRESIDENT

 

 

            (NIPUR CHANDNA)                                                                      (H M VYAS)

                  MEMBER                                                                                       MEMBER