Jharkhand

Bokaro

cc/15/130

Madheswar Prasad Sing - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

Shri Sanjay Kapoor

21 Jun 2018

ORDER

Complainant Madheshwar Prasad Singh has filed this case for a claim of Rs. 7000/- and compensation of Rs. 15000/- for mental harassment and litigation cost of Rs. 4000/-.

2          The brief case of the complainant is that in April 2011, O.P. No.1 HDFC Bank asked on Phone that you have account in my Bank and some information is required. He asked for the credit card Number but he did not say as it was not remembered by him. Then asked for date of birth and complainant told him and thereafter the phone has disconnected. After 15 days, O.P. No.2 HDFC General ERGO General Insurance Co. Ltd. sent a letter in which it was mentioned that having received consent on phone life insurance policy is being sent. When the complainant saw the policy, it was found that the policy was for a sum of Rs. 25,00,000/- and the name of his wife is also mentioned and the premium of Rs. 6899/- has been mentioned.

            Complainant went to the O.P. No.1 who told it is related with the insurance branch and go there and ask. But complainant could not find office of the O.P. No.2 at Bokaro. The matter was dropped by the complainant on being thought he had not paid any amount and had not signed the proposal.

            After three years, O.P. No.1 informed him that there is arrear in his credit card account, please pay. When the complainant reached the office of the O.P. No.1 he found since 2011 Rs. 6899/- was in arrear and he has to pay interest thereon. Complainant asked without his knowledge how the money was withdrawn. O.P. No.1 has not given any satisfactory answer and then the complainant come to the conclusion that it is connivance between O.P. No.1 and 2 and O.P. No1 always putting pressure on phone for the payment. Thereafter, complainant received advocate notice of the O.P. No.1 dt. 09.07.2015 for the arrear of Rs. 24,663/- and asked to come at Patna for conciliation. On 15.09.2015 the Kolkata Office of the O.P. No.1 asked to pay the amount of the credit card, failing which the S. B. Account of the complainant shall be put on hold and lastly they told to pay Rs. 7000/- and the complainant paid the amount in the credit card account and this is the deficiency in service, hence this case has been filed.

3          The following documents have been filed in support of his case:-

Anx-1 and 1/1 Copies of the policy and premium.

Anx-2 Copy of the legal notice of O.P. No.1.

Anx-3 Copy of the counter foil of payment of Rs. 7000/-.

4          O.P. No.1 Branch Manager, HDFC Bank, Bokaro has not appeared and Ex-parte proceeding has been initiated.

5          O.P. No.2 HDFC ERGO General Insurance Co. Ltd. appeared and filed. W.S. It is submitted that the complainant had taken individual personal accidental plan having policy No. 50690553 for  a term of one year staring on 23 April, 2011 on payment of premium of Rs. 6899/-. After received of the policy there is pre look period of 15 days but the complainant has not informed the O.P. regarding non acceptance of the policy. It is denied that the complainant had no conversation with the O.P. No.2 for his consent and filed the copy of the recorded conversation in C.D. as well as transcription of the voice recording. Therefore, the complaint is not maintainable since cause of action arose on the received of the policy in 2011 and so it is time barred and therefore, this complaint is not maintainable.

            The following Anx has been produced by the O.P. No.2:-

Anx-A and A/1 Copies of the voice conversation C.D. and transcription.

Anx-B Copy of the policy.

Anx-C Copy of the terms and conditions.

                                                F I N D I N G S

6          We perused the record and hold that complainant has paid premium for the policy and therefore he is a consumer and the dispute is a consumer dispute.

7          Having gone through the Anx-A/1 filed by the O.P. No.2  insurance co. it is clear that there was a voice conversation on phone with the complainant and the complainant had also provided the last 4 digit of the credit card number and further at the end he also said agreed for the policy.

            The admission in Anx-A/1 is sufficient to prove the complainant had given consent for the policy and further as per the Anx-C the terms and condition shows there is a 15 days free looking period available to the complainant to cancel the policy and the return back to the O.P. No.2 but the complainant kept mum over the issue. Although the complainant has not mentioned the date of the receiving of the policy but admitted in the complaint that having received the policy he went to the O.P. No.1 to enquire about the payment. It is also admitted by the complainant after three years of time he received a legal notice for the payment of arrear in his credit card account.

8          The fact mentioned by the complainant in the complaint petition do not found to be satisfactory in the light of Anx-A/1 Anx –C filed by the O.P. No.2. Thus, the complainant has concealed the important facts whether he had return back the policy within 15 days of free look period or not. Meaning thereby the complainant had accepted the policy and therefore, he cannot claim the amount he has paid through the credit card account. The claim is time barred also and having no cause of action for this case.

9          Accordingly we hereby dismiss this case without any cause of action.

            O.C. is directed to deposit record in the record room.