BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.
Complaint No.299 of 2016
Date of Instt. 15.07.2016
Date of Decision: 06.12.2017
Ajit Singh S/o Late Karam Singh resident of Village Dheena, Jalandhar Cantt., Jalandhar.
..........Complainant
Versus
Post Master, General Post Office, Jalandhar.
..….…Opposite party
Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.
Before: Sh. Karnail Singh (President)
Sh. Parminder Sharma (Member)
Present: Complainant in person.
Sh. GPS Rana, Adv Counsel for the OP.
Order
Karnail Singh (President)
1. This complaint is filed by the complainant, wherein alleged that he is an Army Ex-Serviceman and holder of the PLI Policy No.APS-694163-L, amounting to Rs.1,00,000/-, issued on 19.09.2006 with the premium of Rs.495/- per month issued from the office of DD APS (PLI) for Addl.DG Aps C/O 56 APO, at that time, the complainant was in service and premium is regularly deducted from his salary and at that time, he was posted at Sikandrabad. On 28.02.2008, the applicant was retired from service and came to his house and the policy remained regular at Post Office, Jalandhar Cantt and the applicant requested to the Post Master to deposit the premium, but they replied in negative and stated that your policy is not coming in this office, at least the office required to produce the PR Book in original and policy with medical certificate and these items were produced respectively, then complainant was directed to visit the office of General Post Office, Jalandhar and accordingly, the complainant approached there and met the concerned official Madam Chander Kanta, who told that the record of the applicant is not available in the office and advised to deposit Rs.54,000/- only, total premium from March 2008 to 30th April, 2014 including interest, on the other hand, the office/department issued him a letter telling the credited amount upto December, 2008, vide letter dated 28.06.2016 and withdrew the policy without PR Book. The above said Madam Chander Kanta had received Rs.54,000/- from the applicant, but did not issue any receipt nor issued the PR Book with entering of the received amount and also told the complainant that PR Book of the complainant is missed some where in the office and advised to apply for duplicate PR Book and accordingly, the complainant deposited Rs.10/- under the receipt No.4791 dated 25.05.2016, but PR Book has not been issued. At last moment, the complainant requested the department to withdraw the policy and refund the deposited amount with interest @ 18% even then the office sent him a letter dated 28.06.2016 to deposit the remaining amount from December, 2008. Otherwise, online it is showed that the amount of the complainant is paid upto 30.04.2014 and as such, the complainant faced critical harassment and department has not been obeying the rules and regulations and as such, the complainant has no alternative except to file the instant complaint with the prayer that direction may be given to the OP to pay the deposited amount with 18% interest to the complainant.
2. Notice of the complaint was given to the OP, who filed a reply and contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the complaint is liable to be dismissed as no necessary party has been made. The office of Jalandhar Cantt and official of Post Office Chander Kanta has not been made a party. On merits, it is admitted that the complainant is an Ex-Serviceman and holder of the PLI Policy No.APS-694163-L, amounting to Rs.1,00,000/-, issued on 19.09.2006 with premium of Rs.495/- per month, but the remaining allegations as made in the complaint are categorically denied and further submitted that the complainant has not deposited the amount of Rs.54,500/- for revival of the policy, if he deposited then he has to produce the receipt. It is also admitted that a letter dated 28.06.2016 was issued regarding revival and issue of duplicate pass book, in response to complainant's letter dated 25.05.2016. As per record of the OP, no premium has been credited after November, 2008 and further submitted that no harassment has been made to the applicant as the premium deposited by the insured for the policy under rule is less than 36 months and no amount is payable to him as per rule and lastly prayed that the complaint of the complainant is without merits and the same may be dismissed.
3. In order to prove the case of the complainant, the complainant himself tendered into evidence his duly sworn affidavit Ex.CA alongwith some documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C9 and closed the evidence.
4. Similarly, counsel for the OP tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.OP-A and one document Ex.OP/1 and closed the evidence.
5. We have heard the complainant in person as well as learned counsel for the OP and also gone through the case file very minutely.
6. After taking into consideration the entire facts as elaborated in the pleading as well as came in the evidence, it has become clear that the complainant is an Army Ex-Serviceman and holder of PLI Policy No.APS-694163-L, amounting to Rs.1,00,000/-, issued on 19.09.2006 with premium of Rs.495/- per month and as per version of the complainant that he retired from service on 28.02.2008 and it is also alleged by the complainant that his monthly premium was deducted from his salary. So, it is clear that after February 2008, the premium was not paid by the complainant and this is the case of the OP that the complainant has paid the premium upto November, 2008 and thereafter, he never paid the premium and as such, the complainant wrote a letter on 25.05.2016 for revival of the insurance and in response to that letter, the OP sent a letter dated 28.06.2016 with the request to deposit the due amount from November, 2008 to 2014 i.e. Rs.54,500/-, but the complainant alleged that he has deposited the said amount with one Chander Kanta, but this version of the complainant is not true one because if he deposited the said amount with any employee of the OP i.e. Chander Kanta, then the complainant had to get a receipt of the same because the amount is not a meager amount rather it is a huge amount of Rs.54,000/-.
7. The complainant alleged that the online record shows that the complainant has paid premium till 30.04.2014 and copy of the online report is placed on the file Ex.C-6, but this document itself does not disclose whether it is issued by the Post Office or not. So, from any angle it is not established that the complainant has deposited the arrears of premium alongwith interest, in total Rs.54,500/- as demanded by the OP, vide letter dated 21.04.2014 Ex.C-8, if the complainant deposited the said amount, then his policy is to be revived. So, accordingly, OP is directed to get deposit the said amount from the complainant and then revive the policy of the complainant and further premium be obtained time to time.
8. In the light of above detailed discussion, we find that the complainant could not able to establish his case but for the interest of justice, complaint of the complainant is disposed of with simple direction to the OP to allow the complainant to deposit the revival amount of arrear of Rs.54,000/- upto 30.04.2014 and then revive the policy and thereafter, the premium be also allowed to the complainant to deposit the amount time to time. At this stage, the complainant is not entitled to get returned the deposited amount because he has to pay 36 months continuous premium, but he has not paid. So, with these directions, the complaint of the complainant is disposed of without any cost and compensation. The complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.
9. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.
Dated Parminder Sharma Karnail Singh
06.12.2017 Member President
