OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KAMRUP,GUWAHATI
C.C.97/07
Present:-
1)Md.Sahadat Hussain, A.J.S. - President
2)Smti Archana Deka Lahkar - Member
M/S Siddartha Distributors Pvt.Ltd. - Complainant
Represented by its Director,
Sri Ranjit Kr.Surana
-vs-
1) National Insurance Company, - Opp.parties
Guwahati Branch Office, M.N.Road, Panbazar,
Guwahati-1.
2) The Branch Manager,
National Insurance Company,
Guwahati Branch Office,
M.N.Road, Panbazar,Guwahati-1.
Appearance : -
Ld.advocate for the Complainant – None appears for the complainant in the stage of oral argument. But, Ld advocate Mr.Raju Goswami appears for the Opp.Party No.1 & 2
Date of argument- 25.1.18
Date of judgment- 13.2.18
JUDGMENT
This is a complaint U/S- 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
1) The complaint was admitted on 17.11.07 and opp.party side filed written statement jointly and thereafter the complainant filed evidence of Sri Ranjit Singh Surana and he was cross-examined by Opp.Party No.1 & 2 side filed evidence of Smti Smita Chakraborty and she was cross-examined by the complainant side ld.counsels. Thereafter, Ld.advocate Ms.Monika Devi Baruah filed written argument on behalf of the complainant and Ld.advocate Mr.Raju Goswami for the opp.parties. We have heard oral argument of Ld.advocate Indrajit Borooah on 25.1.2018, but opp.party side was found absent on that day and today we deliver the judgment which is as below.
2) The complainant’s plea is that the complainant did two policies for fire and allied Perils with Add on cover of Earthquake and Terrorism (vide policy No. 200102/11/04/31/00001037 for the period from 11.3.05 to 10.3.06 charging a gross premium of Rs.14,238/- and another a Burglary Policy vide No.200102 /46 /04 /75/00000352 for the period from 11.3.05 to 10.3.06 charging a gross premium of Rs.10,866/-) and Rs.25,104/- was credited from his account of Bank of India on the basis of said policies, but the bank requested opp.party to delete the coverage of earthquake and terrorism premium and to reduce the rate of premium of Burglary premium and it was requested that total coverage should be reduced from 34 Lacs to 24 Lacs and accordingly a sum of Rs.7,053/- which is included Rs.3,857/- against fire policy and Rs.3,196/- against burglary policy as on 4.5.2005 was refunded to complainant company. Complainant company prayed to the opp.parties to reduce the premium and the latter agreed to reduce the rate of fire policy by 1% ,burglary policy by 2.5% and accordingly the rate has been reduced to the tune of Rs.5,025/- which is includes Rs.3,967/- against fire policy and Rs.1,150/- against burglary policy and therefore, the total refund comes to Rs.12,078/- and Opp.Party No.2 returned said amount vide letter dated.18.7.2005 with a letter to the bank , but the bank vide letter dated.29.6.2005 requested Opp.Party No.2 for cancelling the said policy as the rate of premium very high and in fact on 27.6.2006 the complainant company wrote to Branch Manager of the bank that the premium rate of the opp.party was quite higher and so the amount that has been returned on the occasion higher insurance rate of premium was quite insufficient and in fact , there is a variation of Rs.10,000/-in comparison with other companies. The bank vide letter dtd. 29.7.2005 requested Opp.Party No.2 to cancel the policy and refund the premium amount. But only a sum of Rs.4,216/- was refunded vide letter dtd. 6.12.2005 and the request of cancel was made on 29.6.2005, but policy was cancelled with effect from 29.7.95 without disclosing any reason, a portion of the premium amount was refunded after five months on 6.12.05. In fact the opp.party retained illegally an amount of Rs.8,479/- , which is entitled for cancellation of the policy and then the complainant company preferred a representation before Opp.Party No.1 & 2 on 20.8.2007 for refund of the balance amount which is Rs.8,479/- but they did not respond to their objection. The opp.party retained the said amount without any authority inspite of fact that the policy stand cancelled as far back in the month of June ,2005 and they kept the matter pending without reason and refunded an amount of Rs.7,053/-, but illegally retained Rs.8,479/-. Therefore, the opp. parties are liable to refund Rs.8,479/- with interest @18% oper annum from the month of June/2005.
3) The pleading of the Opp.Party No.1 & 2 is that they had issued fire policy bearing No. 200102/11/04/31/00001037 and a Burglary Policy bearing No.200102 /46 /04 /75/00000352 in the name of the complainant and policies are submitted to Guwahati Branch Office of Bank of India, which is the banker of complainant, It is not true that they signed the proposals of the policies without the consent of the complainant. The complainant selected the same insured at Rs.34,00,000/- and on the request of the complainant, the same assured was reduced to Rs.24,00,000/- under each of the policies and consequently refunded that premium of Rs.3,857/- under fire policy and Rs.3,196/- under burglary policy and thereafter on the request of the complainant the premium of fire policy was reduced to Rs.3,969/- and Burglary Policy to 1,058/- Both the policies were issued for one year covering the period from 11.3.2005 to 10.3.2006 and policies were finally cancelled on the request of the complainant with effect from date of request vide letter dtd.29.7.2005 of the branch manager of the Bank of India. As per rules and regulations which is govern the Fire Insurance Contract all over the country a minimum premium as per short period scale was written by the opp.party from the date of inception of risk from 11.3.2005 to 29.7.2005 i.e. the date of cancel of policies . As per rules premium refund under fire policy was Rs.2,564/- and Rs.1,652/- under burglary policies and premium of Rs. 3,850/- under fire policy and Rs.4,960/- under Burglary Policy which has been written by them is for the period from 11.3.2005 to the date of cancellation of the policies (27.9.2005) during which opp.party was on risk and would have been liable for any loss and damage and therefore, they are legally and contractually entitled to premium so retained by them and hence there is no illegally in retention of premium of Rs.8,810/- for the period from 11.3.05 to 27.9.2005 during which opp.party was on the risk and therefore, the complainant is not entitled to full premium as claimed. As per rules and regulations in the All India Tariff. There is no illegality in charging premium by opp.party under the instant policies. There is no deficiency of service on their part and accordingly the complainant is not entitled to the amount of Rs.8,479/- from them.
4) We have perused the pleading as well as evidence of both the parties and found that both sides admit that the complainant did two policies i.e. one for fire, allied perils, earthquake and terrorism vide policy No. 200102 /11 /04/ 31/ 0000 1037 for the period from 11.3.05 to 10.3.06 charging a gross premium of Rs.14,238/- and another a Burglary Policy vide No.200102 /46 /04 /75/00000352 for the period from 11.3.05 to 10.3.06 charging a gross premium of Rs.10,866/-with the opp.party National Insurance Company Ltd., Guwahati branch, Panbazar and according the policy a sum of Rs.25,104/- was credited from the account of the complainant from Bank of India, Guwahati branch and the complainant requested the opp.party to delete the cover of earthquake and terrorism premium and also to reduce premium of coverage of burglary and also requested that total coverage should be reduced from 34 lacs to 24 lacs and accordingly premium of first policy was Rs.7,053/- and of second policy Rs.3,196/- was refunded to him . It is also admitted fact that on the request of the complainant the opp.party agreed to reduce the rate of fire policy by 1% and burglary policy by 2.5% and the rate has been reduced to the tune of Rs.5025/- which includes Rs.3967/- against the fire policy and Rs.1500/- against the burglary policy and accordingly total reference comes to Rs.12,078/- and with refund was returned by Opp.Party No.2.
The complainant’s plea is that the Senior Manager of Bank of India vide letter dtd.29.6.05 requested Opp.Party No.2 for cancelling the policies as the rate of premium was very high and opp.parties also wrote to the bank that the rate of premium was quite high and the refunded amount was quite insufficient on the occasion of high insurance rate of premium and there is variation of Rs.10,000/-for their companies and then the branch manager of the bank of India vide letter dtd. 29.7.15 requested the Opp.Party No.2 to cancel the policies and refund the premium amounts, but only Rs.4,016 was refunded vide letter 6.12.2005 and that request for cancellation was made on 29.6.2005 and policies were cancelled with effect from 29.7.05 without disclosing any reason and a portion of premium was refunded after five months 6.12.2005 and the opp.party had illegally retained amount of Rs.8,479/- which he was entitled to get back. In this respect the version of the opp.party side is that they have not illegally retained Rs.8,810/- for the period of 11.3.2005 to 29.7.2005. The complainant requested them to cancel the policies vide leter dtd. 29.7.2005 and they cancelled the policies w.e.f. 27.9.05 and that they would have been liable to pay compensation for any loss and damage to the complainant w.e.f. 11.3.2005 (the date of start of 2nd year) to 27.9.2005 (the date of filing cancellation request by the complainant) and in result they retained Rs.8,910/- as premium for the period from 11.3.2005 to 29.7.2005. It is found that the opp.party did not delay cancellation of the policies and they cancelled the policies on the date of receiving the cancellation request from the complainant. Therefore, we are of opinion that the op.party side lawfully retained Rs.8,810/- as premium from 11.3.2005 to 29.7.2005 . Therefore, we hold that the complainant is not entitled to get any relief from this forum as prayed.
5) Because of what has been discussed as above, the complaint against the opp.parties is dismissed on contest.
Given under our hand and seal on this the 13th day of Feb,2018.
(Smti.Archana Deka Lahkar) (Md.Sahadat Hussain)
Member President
