Delhi

New Delhi

CC/1524/2008

Dr. Narender Mohan - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

18 May 2015

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

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

VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

NEW DELHI-110002.

 

Case No.CC/1524/08                                                                                                                                                                              Dated:

In the matter of:

1. Dr. NARENDER MOHAN,

A-88/55, KALKA JI EXTENSION,

NEW DELHI-110019.

 

         ……..COMPLAINANT

 

VERSUS

 

1. ROYAL SUNDRAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD., 605, 6^TH FLOOR, ASHOKA ESTATE, 24, BARAKHAMBA ROAD, NEW DELHI-11001

 

2. ROYAL SUNDRAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO.LTD., REGISTERED OFFICE: 21, PATULLOS ROAD, CHENNAI-600014.

 

 

………. OPPOSITE PARTY

ORDER

Member :  Ritu Garodia

 

The short fact of alleged deficiency is that complaint was having a Health shield Policy bearing No. HA 000000005000100 from 4.6.2002 which continued till 2007.  The premium was submitted to OP automatically every year from American Express Card.  However, in year 2008, Complainant’s policy lapsed due to non remittance of premium from the card.  Various correspondences were exchanged and complaint was filed.  OP in its reply has alleged that American Express Card bearing No.376937601641003 held by complainant expired on 1.3.2008 and as such premium could not be remitted. Consequently, the policy lapsed. 

Perusal of record file reveals that policy from 2002-2007 (annexed with complaint) contain the  rider ”As you had opted for our automatic renewal facility at the time of enrollment, your cover will be automatically renewed and the premium of……. has been charged to your American Card Account”.  Complainant has also annexed a letter dated 3^rd Sept.,2009 from American Express Banking Corporation which discloses that the American Express Credit Card bearing No.376937601641003 was valid during the period of March, 2008 to Sept.,2008.

          The OPs allegation that policy lapsed due to expiry of card holds no credibility in view of letter elucidating the validity of card.  There might have been some internal error or mismanagement in OP company whereby renewal was overlooked.  OP, instead of accepting its mistake and renewing the policy, chose to go into lengthy and unnecessary litigation.

The conduct of OP squarely falls within the deficiency of service and OP is directed to renew the policy in continuation with earlier policy.    We also award Rs.25,000/- as compensation for harassment mental agony, and physical inconvenience inclusive of litigation expenses.

The order shall be complied with within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of the order; otherwise action can be taken under Section 25 / 27 of the Consumer Protection Act.

Copy of the order be sent to the parties free

of cost.

Pronounced in open Court on 18.05.2015.

 

 

(C.K.CHATURVEDI)

PRESIDENT

 

 

(S.R. CHAUDHARY)               (RITU GARODIA)

MEMBER                                 MEMBER