Orissa

Rayagada

CC/8/2017

Sri C.A. Manoj Kumar Choudhury - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager, Axis Bank - Opp.Party(s)

Self

02 Feb 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT   CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL    FORUM, RAYAGADA,

STATE:  ODISHA.

C.C. Case  No. 08  / 2017.                              Date.      2 .    2   . 2019.

P R E S E N T .

Dr. Aswini  Kumar Mohapatra,                                      President

Sri GadadharaSahu,                                                          Member.

Smt.PadmalayaMishra,.                                                   Member

 

Sri Manoj Kumar Choudhury, Charted Accountant,New Colony,Po/Dist: Rayagada, State:Odisha.   Pin No. 765 001                          .…….Complainant

Vrs.

          1.The Branch Manager, Axis Bank, New Colony, Rayagada(Odisha).

          2.The Manager, Max lie Insurance , Operation centres, Udyog Vihar, Gurgaon.

3.Sri Sanjay Kumar  Mallick, Field Officer, Axis  bank, Rayagada (Odisha).                                                                                                                    …  Opposite Parties.

For the Complainant:- Self..

For the O.P.  No.  1 :-  Sri  K.Ch.G.S.Kumandah, Advocate, Rayagada..

For the O.P No.2:- In  person.

For the O.P.No.3:- Set Exparte..

JUDGEMENT

The  present disputes emerges out of the grievance raised in the  complaint petition filed by the above named complainant alleging deficiency in service  against  afore mentioned O.Ps for  non revival of Max life insurance  policy  No.873277339 without charging  penalty    for which  the complainant  sought for redressal of the grievances raised by the complainant.

Upon  Notice, the O.P No.1 & 2  put in their appearance and filed  written version through their learned counsel in which  they refuting allegation made against them.  The O.P No. 1 & 2    taking one and another pleas in the written version   sought to dismiss the complaint as it is not maintainable  under the C.P. Act, 1986. The facts which are not specifically admitted may be treated  as denial of the O.P No. 1 & 2.   Hence the O.P  No.1 & 2  .prays the forum to dismiss the case against  them  to meet the ends of justice.

Upon  Notice, the O.Ps 3   neither entering in to appear before the forum nor filed their  written version inspite of more than  11 adjournments has been given  to them. Complainant consequently filed his memo and prayer to set exparte of the O.Ps 3.  Observing lapses of around 1 years  for which the objectives  of the legislature of the C.P. Act going to be astroyed to the prejudice of the interest of the complainant.  Hence after hearing  the  counsel for the complainant set the case  exparte against the O.Ps No.3. The action of the O.Ps No.3  were against the principles of  Lex-comitatus  as envisaged  under section  13(2) (b)(ii) of the Act. Hence the O.Ps  No.3    set exparte  as the statutory period  for filing of  written version was over to close the case with in the time frame permitted by the C.P. Act.

Heard arguments from the learned counsels for  both  the    parties.    Perused the record, documents, written version  filed by the parties. 

This forum  examined the entire material on record  and given  a thoughtful consideration  to the  arguments  advanced  before us by  the  parties touching the points both on the facts  as well as on  law.

                                                               

                                                                    FINDINGS.

From the records it reveals that, there is no dispute that the complainant  is a  “Max Life gain plus 20 year 6 Pay” plan holder  bearing policy No. 873277339 commencement  date from 24.9.2012 stipulating  for an annual premium  a sum of  Rs.48,464.72 against the sum assured Rs. 3,79,786.00 (copies of the  policy document is in the file which is marked as Annexure-I). Furher  there is no dispute the complainant  had duly paid the renewal premium  for the year  2013.

The main grievances of the complainant  was that  he had handed over  cheque for the yearly premium for the year 2014 and 2015  to the O.P. No.1(Axis bank) but some or other plea  they have not encashed the same  and  imposed  penalty against the complainant  to deposit the premium amount  without any fault.  Aggrieved the same action pf the  Axis bank the  complainant approached this forum. Hence this C.C. case.

The  O.P No.2  (Max life) in their written version clearly submitted that  the complainant paid the renewal premium due for the year 2014 and 2015 through  cheques. However,  due to some inadvertent error, the said cheques could not be  deposited in time and resultantly, the policy of the complainant moved to lapsed status.  The O.P.  No.2 is agreeable to revive the policy of the complainant without charging any additional  penalty  amount.

During the course of hearing the complainant  also agreed to revive the  above policy  by depositing  outstanding  yearly premiums  without  payment  of penalty amount.

This forum completely agreed the views taken in the  written version  by the O.P. No.2 (Max life) to  revive the above policy without charging  any additional payament/penalty.

Hence to meet the ends of justice the following  order is passed.

                                               

                                                ORDER.

In  resultant  the complaint  stands allowed in part  against  the  O.Ps.

The  O.P. No.1(Axis bank) is ordered to receive the  balance yearly premium  of the policy  No.  873277339   from the complainant without charging  penalty and interest  inter alia issue receipt against the payment in favour of the complainant.

The O.P. No.2  (Max life) is ordered  to revive the  policy No .  873277339   within  7 days  after receipt  of the premiums from the complainant.

The complainant is  directed to deposit the  balance  yearly premiums  of the policy  No.  873277339  in the counter of the Axis bank, Rayagada within 7 days  from the date  of  receipt of this order.

The above order is to be complied by the parties within one month  from the date of receipt of this order. In the peculiar circumstances  there is no order as to costs.

Copies of the order be served on the parties  concerned as per rule.

Dictated and  corrected by me.

Pronounced on this                   2^nd day of  February, 2019.

 

MEMBER.                                MEMBER.                                            PRESIDENT.