Delhi

North

CC/223/2011

GAURAV KUMAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

SBI - Opp.Party(s)

28 Jan 2016

ORDER

ROOM NO.2, OLD CIVIL SUPPLY BUILDING,
TIS HAZARI, DELHI
 
Complaint Case No. CC/223/2011
 
1. GAURAV KUMAR
463, GROUND FLOOR, INDIRA VIHAR, NEAR MUKHERJEE NAGAR, DELHI
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. SBI
DELHI UNIVERSITY BRANCH, UTILITY CENTER, DELHI
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. MOHI PRESIDENT
 HON'BLE MR. Subhash Gupta MEMBER
 
For the Complainant:
For the Opp. Party:
ORDER

O R D E R

 

SUBHASH GUPTA, MEMBER

The complainant has filed the present complaint against the O.P u/sec. 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The brief facts as alleged in the complaint are that the complainant was having saving bank account No.30082368248 in the State Bank of India, Delhi University Branch, Utility Center, Delhi.  It is also alleged in the complaint that the complainant was holding a Life Insurance Policy (Jeevan Saral) No.124953175.  The premium of this policy @ Rs.255/- per month was being paid through ECS from his saving bank account w.e.f. June 2009 under his instruction.  It is further alleged in the complaint that the premium of this policy for the month of June, July, August and September 2010 and also for the month of March and April 2011 were not paid by the O.P though he had sufficient fund in his account.  His life insurance policy agent informed him about the non-payment of the premium and lapse of the policy due to non-payment by the bank.  It is alleged that complaints were made to the bank and he received a reply from the bank that due to technical reasons and non-supply utility code of the LIC the payment through ECS could not be made.  The complainant also made complaint to the banking ombudsman which dismissed the complaint on 13.04.2011.  Therefore, he has filed the present complaint for claiming Rs.2,500/- as late fee paid by him towards LIC premium and Rs.5,000/- as litigation cost.  Complainant has also sought the relief of Rs.50,000/- towards mental harassment/ agony.

2.     Notice of the complaint was issued to the O.P which has filed its written statement.  It has not been disputed that the complainant has saving bank account with it.  The O.P has denied the facts of the complaint and stated that the complaint is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed.  It is also stated in the written statement that due to change of utility code of LIC without the knowledge of bank, the Bank has no occasion to release the ECS.  The O.P has also stated that ECS could not be released due to technical reasons.

3.     We have gone through record placed on record by the complainant.  The statement of account shows that ECS transfer of Rs.255/- on 07.05.2010 was made by the bank and after that no amount of Rs.255/- i.e. the installments of the premium was made to the LIC.  The statement of account also shows that the complainant was having sufficient fund in his account during this period.  The bank vide his letter dated 19.03.2011 filed by the complainant have admitted the non-transfer of premium amount through ECS due to non-availability of the utility code.  The bank has also admitted that it has come to its knowledge about the non-release of the premium in September 2010.  It is further admitted by the bank that since October 2010 the premium is being paid through ECS without any change mandate.  The bank in this letter at the end has assured that it will not be repeated in future.  In our view vide this letter bank has admitted the case of the complainant.  The LIC receipt placed on record by the complainant shows that the premium of 4 installments was paid on 16.09.2010 on which a sum of Rs.15.10 only was charged as late fee.  The complainant has not filed any other receipt which shows that he has paid late fee on account of other premium.  It is also pointed out that no document has been filed to show that policy in question has lapsed due to non-payment of premium through ECS by O.P.

4.     In view of the observation made above, we find that the OP was deficient in service and is liable to refund a sum of Rs.15.10 to the complainant which was paid by him as late fee.  The complainant is awarded a sum of Rs.2,000/- as compensation towards mental agony and harassment which will also include cost of litigation.  This amount shall be payable within 45 days from date of the receipt of the order.  In case this amount is not paid within stipulated period, the complainant will also be entitled to interest @ 6% after expiry of the said period till its actual realization.  Ordered accordingly.

Copy of the order be sent to the parties as per rules.

  Announced this 28th day of January,2016.            

 

   (K.S. MOHI)               (SUBHASH GUPTA)                     (SHAHINA)

     President                          Member                                  Member

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. MOHI]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'BLE MR. Subhash Gupta]
MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.