Delhi

West Delhi

CC/13/65

Sh. J.C. Khanna - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s Bharti AXA Life Insurance Company Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

13 Jul 2017

ORDER

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM (WEST)

GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI

150-151 Community Centre, C-Block, JanakPuri, New Delhi – 110058

                                                                                                Date of institution: 08.02.2013

Complaint Case. No. 65/13                                           Date of order:13.07.2017

IN  MATTER OF

Sh. J.C. KhannaS/o Sh. H.R.Khanna, R/o  144 Venus Apartments, Indra  Enclave, Rohtak Road, New Delhi -­110087.

                                                                                                                        Complainant

VERSUS

1.        M/s  Bharti AXA   Life Insurance Company Ltd., Block No. 8, Tilak Nagar, New  Delhi-110018

Opposite  party No.1

2.        M/s BhartiAXA  Life Insurance  Company  Ltd.  Unit 601 & 602, 6^th Floor, Raheja Titanium, Off. Western Express Highway, Goregaon(E) Mumbai-400063.

Opposite  party No.2

ORDER

R.S. BAGRI,PRESIDENT

            Sh. J.C. Khanna named above herein the complainant has filed the present consumer complaint under section 12 of The Consumer Protection Act against M/s.Bharti AXA Life Insurance  Company  Ltd. and another herein after in short referred as the opposite parties for directions to the opposite parties to pay a sum of

Rs. 18,000/-, amount paid by the complainant to the opposite  parties to invest in a policy,  Rs. 50,000/- towards mental pain and agony and Rs. 2,000/-  as litigation expenses.

            Brief relevant facts necessary for disposal of the complaint are that             Sh. Manish  Tandon FCM of the  opposite parties approached the complainant and persuaded him to invest in an  insurance plan and also explained  schemes  and  plans introduced by the opposite parties for one time premium.   The complainant was not convinced with the plans explained, therefore,  S/Sh. B.R. Saxena and Shiva Pathak FCMs of the  opposite parties  again explained  the plans at length.   The complainant  convinced and agreed  to invest a sum of Rs. 40,000/-  in the insurance plan.  The conduct of the officers of the opposite parties  amountsto  unfair trade practice. Therefore, the complainant several times asked the opposite parties to refund the sum of Rs. 18,000/- invested by him in the insurance policy  no. 5004884515.  The opposite parties did not  pay any heed to request of the complainant.  Therefore, the complainant on 31.08.2010  send a legal notice  to the opposite parties  to refund the amount invested by him.   The opposite parties neglected and failed to respond the letter of the complainant.  Therefore, the complainant approached Insurance Regulatory Development Authority.  Who vide  letter dated 08.09.2010 directed the complainant  to approach the Ombudsman, Consumer Forum or the Civil Court .  Hence the present complaint  for directions to the opposite parties to pay a sum of Rs.18,000/- amount paid by the complainant to the opposite  parties to invest in a policy,  Rs. 50,000/- towards mental pain and agony and Rs. 2,000/-  as litigation expenses.

            After notice the opposite parties appeared and filed  reply  while contesting the complaint and  raising  the preliminary objections of maintainability ,  cause of action and locus-stand, concealment  of true and material facts and complaint is  false and frivolous, therefore liable to be dismissed  with cost.

            On merits the opposite parties asserted that the complainant after understanding features  and terms and  conditions of the policy filled in and signed proposal form no. 4613399 on 13.01.2010 for  obtaining “ Merit Plus EDGE”  insurance policy  for insured sum of Rs. 2,00,000/-  in the name  of his grandson AkshitKhanna and paid sum of Rs. 20,000/-  as first premium vide cheque no. 201828.The opposite parties  issued policy  no. 5004884515  on 15.01.2010 .  The policy documents were sent to the complainant on 22.01.2010  thorughOvernite Courier vide AWB no. 524621078 and was  received  by the complainant on 27.01.2010.  The complainant  was given 15 days time to cancel  the policy  if he was not satisfied with the policy.  But the complainant  did not cancel  the policy within  15 days of “ the free- look period”.   The complainant   for the first time vide  letter dated 08.10.2010 wrote  for cancellation of policy .  Whereas he had  option  to cancel the policy within 15 days“ the free look period”  from receipt of  documents  of the policy, therefore, he had no right to cancel  the policy  vide

 

letter dated 08.10.2010.   Therefore, the opposite parties vide letter dated 20.10.2010sent information to the complainant that he did not avail option for cancellationwithin  time  that is free look period.  The opposite parties vide letter dated 28.01.2013 intimated the complainant that the policy  no. 5004884515 has been already cancelled  and after adjusting  expenses the opposite parties  refunded the sum of Rs. 2940.89   vide cheque no. 136560 dated 24.01.2013  to the  complainant.  All other allegations of the complaint  arevehemently denied  and once again  prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

            The complainant filed rejoinder to the reply of the opposite parties while controverting stand of the opposite parties and reiterating his stand. He once again prayed for directions to the opposite parties

            When Sh. J.C.  Khanna complainant   was asked to lead  evidence by way of affidavit , he filed  affidavit narrating facts of the complaint.  He also relied upon letter dated 31.08.2010 and letter dated 12.09.2011.  When the opposite parties were asked to lead evidence by way of  affidavit , they  tendered in evidence  affidavit of  SanehalataNago, Manager Legal narrating the facts of the reply. The opposite parties  also relied upon  Annexure OP-1  proposal form no. 4613399alongwithillustrationof  benefits,  explanation, information and  terms and conditions of the policy ,  Annexure OP-2   proposal  form no. 4487929 alongwithillustration of   benefits,  explanation, information and  terms and conditions of the

policy , Annexure OP-3  letter  dated 22.10.2010  information that complainant did not avail option of cancellation within the free look period,  Annexure OP-4 letter dated30.09.2011 and  Annexure OP-5  letter dated  25.10.2011 intimation, Annexure OP-6 letter dated 05.01.2012,  Annexure OP -7  letter dated 07.03.2012  intimation of cancellation of the policy and Annexure  OP -8 letter dated  28.01.2013 of termination of the policy.

From  pleadings  of the parties , affidavits of the parties and  documents relied upon by both the sides it is common case of  parties that the complainant  on 13.01.2010 filled in proposal form  no. 46613399   for obtaining  “ Merit Plus EDGE”  policy  in name of his grandson AkshitKhanna.  He paid a sum of Rs. 20,000/- vide cheque no. 201828.  The opposite parties  on 15.01.2010  issued policy    no. 5004884515.  The policy documents were sent by the opposite parties to the complainant on 22.01.2010  and received  by him  on 27.01.2010 .  The case of the complainant is that he purchased policy of one time premium of Rs.40,000/-.

Therefore, the opposite parties played fraud upon the complainant, adopted unfair trade practice and cheated him.  Whereas the case of the opposite parties is thateven according to the complainant the features and terms and conditions of the policy were explained to the complainant. Who voluntarily filled in  and signed the proposal  form and opposite parties  on the basis of the proposal form issued policy no. 5004884515 dated 15.01.2010. 

            Admittedly  the documents of the policy  were sent by the opposite parties    to the complainant on 22.01.2010 and received by him on 27.01.2010.  The complainant for the first time asked the opposite parties to cancel the policy vide letter dated 08.10.2010.  Before proceeding further it is  worthwhile to  reproduce terms and conditions of surrender policy prescribed in Annexure OP 1.Which reads as under:-       

“ You have an option  to surrender  the plan by paying surrender charge.  Free look option:- if you disagree with  any  of the terms and conditions of the Policy, you will have the option to return the  original Policy Bond along with a letter  stating  reasons for the objection within  15 days of receipt of the  Policy  Bond .”

             From bare reading of the above free look period and surrenderplan  it is crystal clear  that the complainant was given 15 days time for cancellation  of the policy from receipt of the policy bond.  The policy bond was received by the complainant on 27.01.2010.  The complainant could cancel the policy within 15 days from 27.01.2010 i.e. up to 11.02.2010.  Whereas he sent a letter for cancellation of the policy on 08.10.2010 after lapse of period of about eight months.  The opposite party  had already cancelled  the policy  of the complainant and  had also refunded  sum  of  Rs.2940.89 vide cheque no. 136560  dated 24.01.2013  after adjusting surrender  charges. 

            Since the complainant did not avail option of cancellation of the policy  within 15 days free look period  from receipt of policy documents that is up to 11.02.2010. Hence the complainant has no right to cancel the policy after free look period. He has failed to prove that there is any unfair trade practice, mis-selling or deficiency  in service on the part of the  opposite parties. Hence there is no merit in the complaint. The same fails and is hereby dismissed.

Order pronounced on :13.07.2017

• Copy of order be sent to the concerned parties free of cost.
• Thereafter, file be consigned to record.

                       

(PUNEET LAMBA)                                                              ( R.S.  BAGRI )

                         MEMBER                                                                     PRESIDENT