DATE OF FILING                    :     25.07.2014.

DATE OF S/R                            :      09.10.2014.

DATE OF FINAL ORDER      :     13.10.2015.

Sri Purna Panja,

son of Haradhan Panja,

residing at Biswaspara, Jagadishpur,

near Nani  Gopal Bagan Bari, P.S. Liluah,

District Howrah.  ……………………………………………………… COMPLAINANT.

• Versus   -

Reliance Life Insurance Company Ltd.,

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

Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra 400710,

And also 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,

And also having its Zonal Office at 4^th Floor,

38B, Himalaya House, Jaharlal Neheru Road,

Kolkata 700071,

And also having its Regional Office at

P4, Dobson Lane, 2^nd Floor,

Near Nataraj Hotel,

Howrah 711101.. …………………………………………………OPPOSITE PARTIES.

                                                P    R    E     S    E    N     T

             Hon’ble President  :   Shri  B. D.  Nanda,  M.A. ( double ), L.L.M., WBHJS.

                               Hon’ble Member      :      Smt. Jhumki Saha.

                                      Hon’ble Member : Shri A.K. Pathak .     

                                                 F  I   N   A    L       O   R   D    E     R

1. This is an application U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986 filed by the petitioner, Purna Panja,  praying for an order   directing the o.ps. Reliance Life Insurance Company Ltd., to return the sum of Rs. 20,000/- including interest till realization and to pay compensation for a sum of  Rs. 60,000/- for physical and mental harassment and Rs. 5,000/- as litigation costs.   

2. The case of the petitioner is that he invested Rs. 20,000/- in Reliance Life Insurance Money Multiplier Plan on 21.12.2012 and the policy no. was 84922598 having known the same from the agent of the o.ps. The petitioner also did not go through the terms and conditions of the policy having it was one time investment and not to make further payment. But in the month of November, 2013 he noticed that it was not one time investment policy but to make payment for continuous 10 years and the maturity date was 28.02.2022. He got confused being a senior citizen. The agent asked him to make further payment of Rs. 20,000/- and told him to make further payment of Rs. 20,000/- and told him that they would turn the policy into a single term policy. The petitioner went to the o.p. for making refund of the money deposited by him but the o.ps. denied and such act of the o.ps. was nothing but unfair trade practice as he was not made known about the terms and conditions of the policy. So he filed the case.       

3.        The o.ps. though appeared in the case and filed written version yet did not contest further and thus the case is heard ex part against the o.ps. Even though the o.ps. in the written version submitted that it was a false case and knowing the terms and condition of the policy  the complainant did not deny the policy and  so the o.ps. are not liable to pay any amount.

4.  The only point is decided herein whether the petitioner is entitled to get the relief as prayed for ?

DECISION  WITH   REASONS      :

5. In support of his case the petitioner being a senior citizen submitted before the Forum that the agent of the o.ps. did not disclose before him that it was a policy of life insurance money multiplier plan for 10 years and so knowing the same as one time payment he deposited Rs. 20,000/- for the policy. He has filed one letter dated 21.12.2012 written to him by Malay  Ghosh, Executive Director / President of the o.p. company welcoming him to the Reliance Life Insurance. He has also produced the policy schedule wherein it is categorically mentioned that the premium paying term is 10 years. The policy also contains the proposal form for life insurance which was duly signed by him in all the pages wherein the terms and conditions of the policy is categorically mentioned. It is noticed from the policy documents that the policy commenced on 21.12.2012 and the date of maturity was 21.12.2022. Further in the very first para of his petition he has stated that he is a senior citizen of India though in the affidavit along with petition he stated his age being 36 years as also in the cause title of the petition. He is a service holder also and placed his copy of his PAN Card as well as his voter identity car and he made a statement “I confirmed that this is my current address and all communications including policy documents needs to be sent in this address”  wherein he also signed even though nowhere his contention is mentioned. Thus on scrutiny of the oral as well as documentary evidences this Forum observed that the petitioner approached the Forum in clean hands and the policy documents showing clearly the tenure of the policy which was for 10 years and making payment for one installment and discontinuing the same rightly considering him as a defaulter not entitled to any payment.     

           In view of above discussion and findings this  Forum finds that the petitioner fails to substantiate his claim.

In the result, the claim case fails.

Court fee paid is correct.

      Hence,

                       O     R     D      E      R      E        D

      That the C. C. Case No.  415 of 2014 ( HDF 415  of 2014 )  be and the same is   dismissed without costs  against o.ps.

      Supply the copies of the order to the parties, free of costs.  

DICTATED  &    CORRECTED

BY   ME.  

  (    B. D.  Nanda   )                                              

  President,  C.D.R.F., Howrah.