DATE OF FILING: 07.02.2014
DATE OF DISPOSAL: 24.05.2018
Sri Karuna Kar Nayak, President.
The complainant Basant Kumar Das has filed this consumer complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, alleging deficiency in service against the Opposite Parties ( in short the O.Ps) and for redressal of his grievance before this Forum.
2. Briefly stated the case of the complainant is that he deposited half yearly premium of Rs.15,000/- and total of such deposit was Rs.1,20,000/-. The first deposit started in the month of September 2009 under policy No. 751594904. For the circumstances beyond the control of the complainant due to sudden sickness, the complainant requested the O.P. for refund of Rs.1,20,000/- alongwith interest. After much persuasions, the O.P. made payment of Rs.92,931.10 in debiting to the Bank account on dated 18.10.2012. Thus there is less payment of Rs.27,768.90 paisa and the interest accrued thereon. The complainant submitted legal notice claiming balance payment of Rs.27,708.90 paisa alongwith interest but there is no response thereon. The O.Ps utilized the money of the complainant in their business and earned interest and hence should have refunded Rs.1,20,000/- and interest. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps the complainant prayed to direct the O.P. to pay balance money of Rs.27,768.90 alongwith interest on Rs.1,20,000/- from September 2009, Compensation of Rs.30,000/-for harassment, causing mental agony, Rs.5000/- towards litigation cost in the best interest of justice.
3. Upon notice the O.Ps filed version through his advocate. It is stated that the complainant after duly deliberating and understanding all the terms and conditions subscribed a policy maker, singing the proposal form bearing No.751594904on 23.09.2009. The O.P. had explained all the terms and conditions of the policy at the time of signing and filing of proposal form, which he agreed. Based upon the information provided by the complainant in proposal form, a policy was issued on 25.09.2009 and the same were dispatched and admittedly he is received. The O.P. as a matter of policy before the law mandates it provides free look period of 15 days to all the policy holders. The complainant was advised to examine the policy carefully and if not satisfied with the terms and conditions, he may return the policy for cancellation within 15 days from the date of receipt of policy and may get back the premium paid by him without asking any question. The complainant is well aware about the above stated terms and conditions regarding the policy. It is categorically stated that had the complainant not been satisfied with the aforesaid conditions of the policy documents, he could have return the policy within 15 days from the date of its receipt and can get the entire premium refunded, which option he has not exercised. The complainant made the surrender requests by submitting the policy documents, surrender form, cancelled cheque and voter ID on 10.10.2012. On receiving the surrender request the O.P. surrendered the policy and sent as letter on 18.10.2012 to the complainant confirming that the policy has been surrendered and surrender value of Rs.92,231.10 has been credited into the bank of the complainant. Unfortunately the O.P. received the letter dated 13.11.2012 issued by the complainant, wherein he demanded full insurance premium amounts deposited by him be refunded instead of surrender value of the policy. The said notice of the complainant was duly replied by the O.P. on 20.12.2012. The terms and conditions of the subject policy were explained to the complainant at the time of filing of proposal form by him. The complainant has duly signed the declaration and authorization wherein the complainant has made the declaration that he fully understands the scope and meaning of the proposal form and confirmed that he has not been induced by anyone to make the proposal. The policy documents which contain all the terms and conditions of the policy were despatched and delivered to the complainant well within time. It is stated that if the complainant was not satisfied and convinced with the terms and conditions of policy, he could have returned the policy within 15 days from the date of receipt under such circumstances policy would have been cancelled and whatever premium paid would have been refunded to him. Complainant failed to exercise such option. The complainant has made false allegations to earn wrongful gains at the cost of the O.P. It is false to say that the O.P. not engaged in unfair trade practice nor the action is unlawful or unconstitutional. The O.P. has not cause any harassment and/or mental agony to complainant. The O.P. is not deficient in service. The complainant is not entitled for compensation as alleged. The complainant wants to take benefit or his own wrong and to put the O.P. as wrongful loss. The relief sought by the complainant should not be granted against the O.P. by the Hon’ble Forum since the same is based on false and malafide averments and hence the complaint deserves to be dismissed with exemplary cost. Hence the O.Ps prayed to dismiss the complaint with exemplary cost in favour of the O.P. in the interest of justice.
4. On the date of hearing of the consumer complaint learned counsel for the complainant as well as O.Ps were present. We heard argument from both sides at length. We perused the complaint petition, written version, written arguments and documents available on the case records. It reveals from the record that the complainant surrendered the policy documents, surrender form, cancelled cheque and voter ID on 10.10.2012. On receiving the surrender request the O.P. surrendered the policy and sent as letter on 18.10.2012 to the complainant confirming that the policy has been surrendered and surrender value of Rs.92,231.10 only has been credited into the bank of the complainant. Before maturity of the certificate the complainant submitted surrendered certificate and the O.P. paid the surrender value of the policy. It is pertinent to mention here that the complainant’s declaration in the proposal form reveal that he fully understands and acknowledges “ (A) Depending upon the market risk and performance of the funds, the value of the units may fall, rise or remains unchanged and there is no guarantee that the objectives of the funds will be achieved”. Further it also reveals that the O.P. has also replied to the pleader notice sent by the complainant’s advocate and has also given the details how the surrender value of the complainant’s policy became Rs.92,231.10 paisa on 10.10.2012.
5. On foregoing discussion, it is clear evident that the O.Ps are not negligent in rendering proper service to the complainant as the policy is an unit linked policy. Hence in our considered view there is no deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.
6. Considering the factual position of the case, the complainant’s case is dismissed against the Opposite Parties on contest without cost.
The order is pronounced on this day of 24th May 2018 under the signature and seal of this Forum. The office is directed to supply copy of order to the parties free of cost and a copy of same be sent to the server of
