THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR

Consumer Complaint No. 259-14

Date of Institution : 12.5.2014

Date of Decision : 3.11.2015

S. Joginder Singh S/o Tara Singh Resident of H.No.24, Village Raya, Tehsil Ajnala District Amritsar, Punjab

...Complainant

Vs.

1. Reliance Life Insurance Co.Ltd. Through its company Secretary/Managing Director/Director/Authorized Person having its registered Office at H Block Ist Floor, Dhiru Bhai Ambani knowledge city, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra PIN 400710

2. Reliance Life Insurance Co.Ltd through its Company Secretary/Managing Director/Director/Authorized Person at 3^rd Floor, Eminent Mall, Mall Road, Amritsar 143001

....Opp.parties

Complaint under section 12/13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986

Present : For the complainant : None

For the opposite parties : Sh. Amit Bhatia,Advocate

Quorum : Sh. Bhupinder Singh, President ,Ms. Kulwant Bajwa,Member &

Sh.Anoop Sharma,Member

-2-

Order dictated by :-

Bhupinder Singh, President

1 Present complaint has been filed by Joginder Sifngh under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act alleging therein that he obtained two policies from the opposite party vide Application No. D1224071 on payment of premium of Rs. 86000/- by way of cheque dated 15.3.2013 and second policy vide application No. D3921584 on payment of premium of Rs. 1,47,000/- by way of cheque dated 30.4.2013. According to the complainant he did not receive the policy documents from the opposite parties. Complainant had made several complaints regarding non delivery of the original insurance policy and requested to issue the original policy but to no avail. Alleging the same to be deficiency in service complaint was filed seeking directions to the opposite parties to immediately cancel the said insurance policies and to refund the amount of Rs. 2,33,000/- alongwith interest. Compensation of Rs. 50000/- alongwith litigation expenses were also demanded.

2. On notice, opposite parties appeared and filed written version in which it was submitted that on the basis of the proposal form duly executed and submitted by the complainant, the opposite parties had issued the following policies alongwith the terms and conditions to the complainant:-

The abovesaid policy documents were dispatched through speed post by the opposite parties and the same were duly received by the complainant as per online confirmation by the Indian Posts. It was submitted that as per section 6(2) of the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority Regulations, 2002, insured can avail free look cancellation or modifications within 15 days of the receipt of the policy document. But the complainant did not opt free look cancellation after the receipt of the policy documents meaning thereby that he has accepted the terms and conditions of the policy. It was further submitted that complainant proposed for first insurance policy on 15.3.2013 and second policy was proposed on 30.4.2013 i.e. after 45 days of the issuance of first policy and in the proposal form No. D3921584 dated 30.4.2013 in column No.22, the complainant has given the detail of earlier policy No. 50842141 which clearly proves that the complainant had received the policy in time but he concocted a false story regarding non receipt of policy documents. If he had not received the policy then there was no occasion for mentioning the detail of policies in the said proposal form. While denying and controverting other allegations, dismissal of complaint was prayed.

3. Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.C-1 alongwith documents Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-6.

4. Opposite parties tendered affidavit of Sh. Savit Chawla Ex.OP1 alongwith documents Ex.OP2 to Ex.OP19.

5. We have carefully gone through the pleadings of the parties, arguments advanced by the ld.counsel for the opposite parties and have appreciated the evidence produced on record by both the parties with the valuable assistance of the ld.counsel for the parties.

6. From the record i.e.pleadings of the parties and the evidence produced on record by both the parties it is clear that complainant obtained two policies from the opposite party vide Application No. D1224071 on payment of premium of Rs. 86000/- by way of cheque dated 15.3.2013 and second policy vide application No. D3921584 on payment of premium of Rs. 1,47,000/- by way of cheque dated 30.4.2013. The complainant submitted that he did not receive the policy documents from the opposite party. The complainant repeatedly requested the opposite party and demanded the policy documents, but the opposite parties did not pay any heed to the request of the complainant. The complainant, therefore, through this complaint wants cancellation of the policies and refund of the premium amounts which the opposite party has not done. The complainant submitted that all this amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the opposite parties qua the complainant.

7. Whereas the case of the opposite party is that the complainant proposed for first Insurance policy on 15.3.2013 and second Insurance policy on 30.4.2013 i.e. after 45 days of the issuance of first policy. In the proposal form D3921584 dated 30.4.2013 in column No. 22 , the complainant has given the detail of earlier policy No. 50842141 which clearly proves that the complainant had received the first policy in time but he concocted this false story regarding non receipt of the policy documents. The first policy bearing No. 50842141 dated 15.3.2013 was sent to the complainant via Speed Post No. EQ546514986IN dated 18.3.2013 which was duly received by the complainant as is evident in the proposal form filled in and signed by the complainant in the second policy forms dated 30.4.2013 bearing No. D3921584 because in column No. 22 the complainant himself has given the details of the earlier policy including its number which fully proves that the complainant had received the first policy. Whereas second policy bearing No. 50967461 dated 3.5.2013 was sent to the complainant through speed post No. EP800028147IN dated 9.5.2013 which was duly delivered to the complainant as per deposition of Ranjit Singh, Postman/G.D.S.,G.P.M., VPO Kakkar District Amritsar who was examined by the opposite party in this Forum on 6.10.2015 who brought the complete record pertaining to speed post No. EP800028147IN and he deposed that he delivered the said parcel to Sher Singh son of Joginder Singh and got his signatures on DO Slip attested copy of which is Ex.OP2 and he delivered the said parcel to said Sher Singh on 17.5.2013. He also brought the original DO General register in which there was entry with regard to delivery of the abovesaid parcel at point A on Ex.OP21 which is attested copy of DO general register. Both these documents have been duly proved by the opposite party through said Ranjit Singh, Postman. So the opposite party has duly proved the policy documents delivered to the complainant. Ld. Counsel for the opposite party submitted that the complaint lodged by the complainant in this Forum, is totally concocted story which is liable to be dismissed as there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party qua the complainant.

8. From the entire above discussion, we have come to the conclusion that complainant obtained two policies from the opposite party. The complainant proposed for first insurance policy on 15.3.2013 and for second insurance policy on 30.4.2013 by filling in and signing proposal forms Ex.OP13 and Ex.OP3 respectively. In the second proposal form No. D3921584 dated 30.4.2013 Ex.OP3 in column No. 22 the complainant has given the details of earlier policy No. 50842141 which fully proves that the complainant had already received the first policy that is why he has mentioned the number and date of the first policy No. 50842141 in the proposal form dated 30.4.2013 Ex.OP3 which the complainant submitted to the opposite party for obtaining the second policy. Whereas the second policy bearing No. 50967461 dated 3.5.2013 Ex.OP13 was sent to the complainant by the opposite party through speed post No. EP800028147IN dated 9.5.2013 Ex. OP19 which was duly delivered to the complainant as per deposition of Ranjit Singh, Postman/G.D.S., G.P.M., VPO Kakkar District Amritsar , who was examined on oath by the opposite party on 6.10.2015 , who brought the complete record pertaining to speed post No. EP800028147IN and he deposed that he delivered the said parcel to Sher Singh son of Joginder Singh (complainant) and got his signatures on DO slip attested copy of which is Ex.OP2 and he delivered the said parcel to said Sher Singh son of the complainant on 17.5.2013. He also brought the original DO General register in which there is entry with regard to the delivery of the aforesaid parcel at point A on Ex.OP21 which is attested copy of DO general register. Both these documents have been duly proved by the opposite party through said Ranjit Singh, Postman. This witness was not cross examined by the complainant despite availing full and proper opportunity, as such his deposition remained unrebutted and unchallenged on record. So it stands fully proved on record that the opposite party has delivered the policy documents to the complainant and were duly received by the complainant. So the plea raised by the complainant in this complaint that he did not receive the policy documents , is not tenable. The complainant had also not availed the option of free look period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the policy documents to get the policy cancelled. Opposite party was, therefore, justified in not accepting the request of the complainant for cancellation of the policy and refund of the premium amount.

9. Consequently we hold that complaint is without merit and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum.

3.11.2015 ( Bhupinder Singh )

President

/R/ ( Kulwant Kaur Bajwa) ( Anoop Sharma )