Order No. 04 / Dated 27/11/2018.
The Ld. Advocate for the complainant is present. The case of the complainant is that he bought one insurance investment policy product from the O.P.-1 against an A/C Payee cheque of Rs.99,000/- and the O.P.-1 sent policy document by post to the complainant.In the policy document the name of O.P.-2 has been mentioned as Agent of O.P.-1. The policy document was not an investment policy but purely an insurance product. The complainant had been to the office of the O.P.-1 and lodged a complaint to the Console Management Consultant of O.P.-1.They kept the original policy bond against acknowledgement with an assurance that premium amount will be refunded within 15 days but till date the O.P.-1 did not refund the policy amount. Being aggrieved of the act of O.P.-1 the complainant approached the Insurance Ombudsman but they did not entertain the complaint. Finding no other alternative, the complainant has brought the instant consumer complaint before this Forum.
On perusal of the consumer complaint as well as documents on record, we find that the complainant invested hard-earned money to the O.P.-1but after receiving the policy document he was astonished that the policy document is not an investment policy but an insurance product. The entire allegation is against the O.P.-1 whose office is situated at A.P.C. Road, Shyam Bazar, Kolkata-700004 outside the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum. The complainant implicated one Pankaj Das of 14, Ho Chi Minh Sarani, P.S. Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata-700017 as O.P.-2 on the ground that his name is appearing in the policy document as Agent / Broker though no relief has sought for against him.
The question falls for consideration as to whether this Forum has got territorial jurisdiction to entertain and decide the instant complaint or not. It may be stated here that according to Section-11(2) of the C. P. Act, 1986a complaint shall be instituted in a District Forum within the local limit of whose jurisdiction-
- The O.P. or each of the O.Ps. where there are more than one, at the time of institution of the complaint actually and voluntarily reside or carrying on business or has a branch office or personally works for gain ;
- Any of the O.Ps. where there are more than one at the time of the institution of the complaint actually and voluntarily resides or carries on business or has a branch office, or personally works for gain provided that in such case either permission of the Dist. Forum is giving or the O.Ps. who do not reside, or personally works for gain, as the case may be, acquiescence in such institution;
- The cause of action wholly or in part, arises.
Contd. 2/-
-2 -
It is significant to mention here that the complainant implicated the O.P.-2 as party to the consumer complaint being an agent of the policy though payment was made to the O.P.-1 and certificate was also issued by O.P.-1 / Insurer in favour of the complainant. Therefore, in our considered view, only mentioning the name of O.P.-2 as agent/broker in the policy document, a part of cause of action is not accrued to the complainant within the jurisdiction of this Forum. As such, the instant complaint cannot be entertained and adjudicate by this Forum. The office of the O.P.-1 falls outside the jurisdiction of this Forum. Therefore, we are not inclined to entertain the instant consumer complaint. The complaint be returned to the complainant or his filing Lawyer for its presentation before the appropriate Forum having territorial jurisdiction.
