Delhi

New Delhi

CC/859/2013

Brig. Satish Kumar Rattan - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. PNB Metlife India Insurance Company Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

05 Apr 2019

ORDER

 

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI (DISTT. NEW DELHI),

‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR, VIKAS BHAWAN,

I.P.ESTATE, NEW DELHI-110002.

 

Case No.CC.859/2013                                                                                 Dated:

In the matter of:

Sh. Satish Kumar Rattan(Retd.),

R/o K-1004, Mahindra Aura Apartment,

Sector 110 A, New Palam Vihar, Gurgaon.

           ……..COMPLAINANT

 

VERSUS

 

1. PNB METLIFE India Insurance Co. Ltd.,

(Through its Managing Director),

1^st Floor, Himalaya House,

23, Kasturba Gandhi Marg,

New Delhi-110001.

 

2. Mr. Sushant Rajput,

Regional Director,

Himalaya House,

23, Kasturba Gandhi Marg,

New Delhi-110001.

   …..OPPOSITE PARTIES

 

ARUN KUMAR ARYA, PRESIDENT

ORDER

 

The complainant has filed the present complaint against the O.Ps under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The facts as alleged in the complaint are that the complainant purchased the first mis-sold policy bearing No.00397018 from the OP and had paid a premium of Rs.99,000/- of Metlif (now PNB Metlife) on 18.9.2007. On receipt of the policy, the complainant realized that the maturity date of policy in question is 18.6.2046 when he would be 100 years whereas the amount of coverage i.e.  sum assured was Rs.4,95,000/-.  The complainant reverted back for clarification of the same and was assured by the agent of OP that payment of three premiums were mandatory and the policy could be surrendered after five years. At the time of surrender, the complainant would receive double the amount invested over three years as the annual return would be 15-20%.

2.     From  August to September 2010, before the 4^th premium was due, Sales Managers, Surender Kumar and H.S. Arora, visited the house of the complainant and requested him to purchase fresh policy  in which previous policy will remain in effect and he would have to pay only two more premium as he had already paid three premiums, being induced by the lucrative promise of the official of the OP, complainant purchased second mis-sold policy bearing No.20421696 in November 2010 by paying a premium of Rs.99,000/, after going through the policy documents, complainant found that it was a new one and was not in continuation of the previous policy as assured by the official of OP at the time of issuing the new policy.  3.      

3.     Complainant approached official of the OP who asked complainant to file a written complaint against his grievance and as such on 26.5.2011, complainant lodged a written complaint with the OP but no action was taken by the OP for redrassal of his grievance.  After continuous protest, an appointment was fixed by the OP for 27.2.2012 with the officials of the OP at complainant’s residence which include Branch Head and two Sales Manager, Sh. Surender Kumar, Sales Manager requested the complainant  not to lodge any complaint against him as he would lose his job and was supporting six members of his family.  The officials of the OP admitted the policy was mis-sold by telling lies.  They suggested the complainant to file partial withdrawal application against the previous policy so that the money would be refunded to him.  On their suggestion, complainant moved an application for partial withdrawal application.  Vide cheue  dated 6.3.2012, OP sent a partial withdrawal of Rs.1,10,000/- and at that time the fund value shows was Rs.2,94,680/-.  On continuous follow-up the second policy was cancelled by the OP and refund of Rs.98,000/- was received by the complainant on 6.7.2012 that too without any penal interest. The complainant wrote various letters, e-mails and even sent legal notice to the OP for the panel interest on the amount lying with OP but nothing has been done by the OP, hence this complaint.

4.     Complaint has been contested by the OP. It denied any deficiency in service on its part.  It is stated that policy the was issued to the  complainant on the basis of information provided by the complainant.  The policy was sent to the complainant  on 10.10.2007, the complainant has remitted the renewal premium till 10.10.2009 and did not make the further payment, resulting in the policy mover to premium discontinuous status.  The complainant received partial withdrawal of Rs.1,10,000/- against the first policy on 6.3.2012 through cheque, due to this the surrender value become less then one annualized  premium and as such 1^st policy foreclosed on 26.9.2012.  The 2^nd policy was taken by the complainant only after complete understanding the terms and conditions of the policy.  However, on the complaint of the complainant that renewal payment towards the policy No.00397018 was wrongly utilized to issue new policy bearing No.20421696, OP cancelled the 2^nd policy and refunded the amount on 6.7.2012.  The complainant sent the satisfactory e-mail dt. 11.7.2012 which clarified that the dispute has been resolved between the parties.   

5.     The complainant has not raised any dispute regarding the 1st policy within the free-looking-period, it was presumed that the contract was legally concluded between the parties.  It is further stated that the complainant has filed the present complaint to extort undue gain well known  the facts that OP had taken all the required steps to satisfied the complainant’s grievance and prayed for dismissal of complaint.

6.     Both the parties have filed their evidences by way of Affidavits.

 

7.     We have heard the arguments advanced at the Bar and have perused the record.

 

8.     We have gone through the documents/annexures filed by the parties along with their respective pleadings. On the request of partial withdrawal  by the complainant, OP had paid a sum of Rs.1,10,000/- through cheque which was duly admitted by the complainant.  Perusal of the  e-mail dt. 11.7.2012 sent by  complainant to the OP shows that  partial withdrawal  amount relating to the old policy as well as the refund of the premium of 2^nd policy was credited in the complainant’s bank account.  The complainant through this e-mail acknowledged that his complaint was diligently  resolved by the OP in his favour. Vide this e-mail he not only acknowledged the redressal of his grievance but also appreciated the efforts done by the official of the OP in resolving the issue.  On his request, the OP not only refunded the amount deposited on account of premium against the 2^nd policy but also honoured the partial withdrawal request of the complainant.  Perusal of the record shows that on various occasion, OP acted according to the sweet will of the complainant and provided him the assistance they can provide.  Despite receiving the partial withdrawal, the complainant failed to pay further premium and as such the policy underwent into lapsed status. 

 

9.     In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered view that  the complainant received the policy documents in the year 2007 but  has not protested or has exercised his right of free-looking period. As such, the contract was deemed to be concluded between the parties and the terms of the same were binding upon both the parties. After the partial withdrawal, the complainant was well aware that non-payment of further premium by him would led to the lapse status of the policy, well knowing this fact the complainant did not pay further premium for getting the policy revived. Admittedly, the complainant has not paid further premium, perusal of the file shows that from the year 2010, complainant has deposited a sum of Rs.2,97,000/- with the OP. In such a circumstances, we direct OP to refund a sum of Rs.2,97,000/- after deducting the partial withdrawl amount if any paid to the complainant against the 1^st policy.

 

10.    With the above observations, the present complaint is disposed off. The order shall be complied within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of the order. If the said amount is not paid by the OP within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order, the same shall be recovered by the complainant along with simple interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of this order till recovery of the said amount. A copy each of this order each be sent to both parties free of cost by post. Orders be also sent to www.confonet.nic.in. File be consigned to record room.

 

 

Pronounced in open Forum on 05/04/2019.

 

                                   (ARUN KUMAR ARYA)

                                           PRESIDENT

(NIPUR CHANDNA)                                           (H M VYAS)

       MEMBER                                                         MEMBER