DATE OF FILING                    :     27.05.2013.

DATE OF S/R                            :      19.06.2013.

DATE OF FINAL ORDER      :     28.01.2015.

Sri Barindra Kumar Pal,

son of late Krishna Pada Pal,

residing at 111/5, Swami Bibekananda Road, P.S.  Shibpur,

District Howrah,

PIN 711101……………..……………………………………………… COMPLAINANT.

• Versus -

   

  1.         Reliance Life Insurance Company Ltd.,

              having its registered office at H, Block, 1^st Floor Dhirubhai Ambani City,

              Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra,

              PIN 400710.

   

  2.         Reliance Life Insurance Company Ltd.,

              having its corporate office at 9^th & 10^th floor, Building no. 2,

              R-Tech Park, Nirlon  Compound, next to Hub Mall,

              behind I Flex Building,  Goregaon ( East ),

              Mumbai 400063.

   

  3.         The Zonal Manager,

              Reliance Life Insurance Company Ltd.,

              having its zonal office at 4^th floor, 38B, Himalaya House,

              Jaharlal Neheru  Road,

              Kolkata 700071.

   

  4.         Reliance Life Insurance  Company Ltd.,

  having its office at P-4, Dobson Lane, 2^nd floor,

  near Nataraj Hotel,

  Howrah 711101.

   

  5.         Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Ltd.,

  having its Zonal Office at 3A, Shakespeare Sarani, 7^th floor,

  Kolkata 700071.

   

  6.         Souvik Nath,

  residing at 91A, Central Road, Jadavpur,

  Kolkata 7000 32.

   

  7.         Branch Manager,

  Indian Overseas Bank,

  having branch office at Howrah.

  PIN 711101…….……………………..…………………… OPPOSITE PARTIES.

   

   

                                                  P    R    E     S    E    N     T

   

  President     :     Shri T.K. Bhattacharya, M.A. LL.B. WBHJS.

  Member       :     Smt. Jhumki Saha.

   

                                                   F  I   N   A    L       O   R   D    E     R

   

• 1. Complainant, Barindra Nath Pal,by filing a petition U/S 12 of the C .P. Act, 1986 ( as amended up to date ) has prayed for a direction to be given upon the o.p. no. 5 to return the deposited amount of Rs. 80,000/- and on  o.p. nos. 1to 4 to pay Rs. 60,000/-  including interest till realization of the amount and to pay Rs. 6,00,000/- as compensation, Rs. 10,000/- as litigation costs  along  with  other relief or reliefs as the  Forum may deem fit and proper.

2. Brief fact of the case is that complainant bought two insurance policies of o.p. nos. 1, 2 & 3 in the names of his two nieces on payment of Rs. 30,000/- i.e., Rs. 15,000/- each as annual premium paid on 24.01.2011 through one composite cheque.And in the next year also complainant paid Rs. 30,000/- in 2012 as 2^nd year premium with respect to those policies. But it is alleged by the complainant that in the 2^nd year i.e., in 2012 the new two agents of o.p. nos. 1, 2, 3 visited the residence of the complainant and asked him to pay 3rd year annual premium in favour of o.p. no. 1. Initially, although complainant refused to do sobut subsequently on being persuaded by those agents, herein this case one of those agents is impleaded as o.p. no. 6, complainant paid Rs. 30,000/- again as 3^rd year premium in favour of o.p. no. 1 on 07.12.2012 through cheque being no. 137453. Complainant, as a very aged person having vision problem, gave the said cheque to the agents, being o.p. no. 6 in this case, who tactfully tore another blank cheque leaf being no. 137454 beyond the knowledge of the complainant. And he could know the fact only when he visited his bank i.e., o.p. no. 7 wherefrom he found that a total amount of Rs. 80,000/- was withdrawn from his account. And after some days he received one booklet from o.p. no. 5 wherefrom he came to know that policy has been issued in the name of his one niece by o.p. no. 5. Moreover, he also came to know that the 3^rd premium which he paid through cheque no. 137453 that was not encashed by o.p. no. 1. It is alleged by the complainant that no cheque was issued in favour of o.p. no. 5 but o.p. no. 6 by way of adopting unfair practice upon complainant, utilized the said blank cheque being no. 137454 in favour of o.p. no. 5 along with the cheque no. 137453 against the will of the complainant. So, complainant lodged one complaint with Shibpur P.S. on 29.04.2013. But nothing fruitful happened. Being frustrated and finding no other alternative, complainant filed this instant petition praying for the aforesaid reliefs.

3. Notices were served upon the o.ps. O.p. nos. 1, 2, 3 & 7 appeared and filed written version.And o.p. no. 5 paid Rs. 97,552.62 p. through cheque no. 972753 dated 22.11.2013 & cheque no. 478734 dated 22.11.2013 to the complainant vide our order no. 9 dated 03.12.2013. And complainant submitted before us that he has no further claim from o.p. no. 5. Accordingly, the case was heard on contest with respect to o.p. nos. 1 to 4 and o.p. no. 7.
4. Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination :

i)          Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps.  ?

1. Whether the complainant isentitled to get any relief as prayed for ?

    

   DECISION  WITH   REASONS      :

   5. Both the points are taken up together for consideration. We have carefully gone through the written version of o.p. nos. 1 to 4 and o.p. no. 7 and noted its contents. O.p. nos. 1 to 4 in its written version vide para nos. 5. 6, 7 & 8 etc. have taken a specific plea that complainant has not furnished the policy name and no. date of issuance etc. In fact they challenged that no policy was at all issued to the complainant but we have perused the proposal form of o.p. nos. 1 to 4 which was filled up and submitted by the complainant. The xerox copy of proposal form no. C 753652 was allotted by o.p. nos. 1 to 4 to the complainant and name of the policy is Reliance Life Insurance Money Multiplier Plan and o.p. nos. 1 to 4 also issued a letter of thanks to the complainant for opting the said policy.Accordingly, the plea taken by o.p. nos. 1 to 4 that no policy was issued to the complainant is not at all tenable in the eye of law vide Annexure. But even after receiving the annual premium for two consecutive years, o.p. nos. 1 to 4 did not issue any policy document, which is definitely deficiency in service. But on the backside of the composite proposal form client IDS of the policy holder and life assured are also given by the o.p. nos. 1 to 4 as 78593203 and 78593163 respectively. Now-a-days it has became our common experience that the agents of the organization like o.p. nos. 1 to 4, always mislead the intending purchasers of insurance policies. O.p. nos. 1 to 4 should remember that the success of their business completely depend upon the ultimate satisfaction of the consumers. They cannot shrug off their duties towards the complainant. Their negligence towards him caused severe mental agony and harassment to the complainant. Accordingly, we are of the candid opinion that it is a fit case where the prayers complainant should be allowed against o.p. nos. 1 to 4. Complainant has not prayed for any relief against o.p. no. 7. Points under consideration are accordingly decided.

      Hence,

                                    O     R     D      E      R      E        D

      That the C. C. Case No. 172 of 2013 ( HDF 172 of 2013 )  be  allowed on contest with  costs  against  the O.P. nos. 1 to 4 and dismissed against o.p. nos. 5 & 7 without costs.   

      That the  O.P. nos. 1 to 4 are jointly and severally directed to refund Rs. 60,000/- to the complainant within one month from this day and cancel all the policies lying  in the names of the nieces of the  complainant with immediate effect.  

      That the o.p. nos. 1 to 4 are further directed to pay Rs. 5,000/- as compensation and Rs. 3,000/- as litigation costs to the complainant.

       That the o.p. nos. 1 to 4 are also directed to pay the entire amount of Rs. 68,000/- to the complainant within one month from this date i.d., 9% p.a. interest shall be charged on the entire amount till actual payment.          

      The complainant is at liberty to put the decree into execution after expiry of the appeal period.

      Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.            

DICTATED  &    CORRECTED

BY   ME.  

      (  Jhumki Saha  )                                                                  

  Member, C.D.R.F.,Howrah.