DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

PATIALA.

                                      Consumer Complaint No. 454 of 30.11.2018

                                      Decided on:   17.9.2021

Didar Singh aged about 45 years son of Sh.Bhupinder Singh R/o H.No.81-B, Bhagat Singh Colony, Rajpura.

                                                                   …………...Complainant

                                      Versus

1. The Branch Manager, HDFC Life, 115, SCO-114, 1^st and 2^nd floor, New Leela Bhawan Market, Patiala.
2. The Branch Manager, HDFC Bank, Branch Grain Market, Rajpura Township, Rajpura, Tehsil Rajpura, District Patiala.
3. The Regional Manager, HDFC Life, SCO 149-151, Sector 43-B, Chandigarh.
4. HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company Ltd., 13^th Floor, Lodha Excelus, Apollo Mills Compound, N.M.Joshi Road, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai Maharashtra-400011.

                                                                   …………Opposite Parties

Complaint under the Consumer Protection Act

QUORUM

                                      Sh. Jasjit Singh Bhinder, President

                                      Dr.Harman Shergill Sullar, Member

ARGUED BY     

                                       Sh.A.S.Bhangu,counsel for the complainant.

                                      Sh.Mayank Malhotra, counsel for OPs No.1,3&4.

                                      OP No.2 ex-parte.

ORDER

                                      JASJIT SINGH BHINDER,PRESIDENT

1. The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant has been availing agricultural credit facility from the OPs and he approached the OP No.2 for extension of his credit limit who agreed to do so and also got signed some papers from the complainant. It is averred insurance policy No.196908220 having the premium of Rs.50,000/- was issued for which the complainant never intended .
2. It is averred that on 3.10.2017 the complainant received a message from the HDFC Bank with regard to the debit of Rs.50,000/- from his loan account towards the payment of the first premium of the above said policy. He approached OP No.2 in this regard and requested for the refund of the amount debited from his account. He also made written request to OP No.1 dated 16.2.2018 in reply to which he was requested to provide documents which he provided but the amount was not refunded. It is further averred that legal notice dated 25.10.2018 was also got sent to the OPs but the OPs failed to give any reply to the legal notice. There is thus deficiency in service on the part of the OPs which caused mental agony, pain and harassment to the complainant. Hence this complaint with the prayer to accept the same by giving directions to the OPs to refund the amount of Rs.50,000/- alongwith interest and also to pay compensation and costs of litigation.
3. Upon notice OPs No.1,3 &4 appeared and filed the written reply whereas none appeared on behalf of OP No.2 and was thus accordingly proceeded against ex-parte.
4. In the written reply filed by OPs No.1,3&4 preliminary objections have been raised with regard to the maintainability of the complaint. On merits, it is admitted that policy was issued to the complainant after receiving the documents from the bank duly signed by the complainant. It is  also admitted that  letter was received by the OPs which was replied vide letter dated 28.2.2018 mentioning therein that the complainant is required to send certain documents for verification. The complainant submitted some documents  and after verification  it was settled that the entire amount of policy will be refunded to the complainant upon submission of documents which are necessary for processing of refund claim. It is pleaded that the complainant did not submit the required documents and the OPs are still willing to refund the entire amount without interest provided the complainant submits all the necessary documents as desired under IRDA as refund case and has prayed that the complaint be dismissed.
5. In support of the complaint, the ld. counsel for the complainant has tendered in evidence Ex.CA affidavit of the complainant alongwith documents Exs.C1 to C8 and closed the evidence.
6. On the other hand, the ld. counsel for OPs has tendered in evidence Ex.OPA affidavit of Arpit, Manager Legal alongwith documents Exs.OP1 to OP4 and closed the evidence.
7. We have heard the ld. counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case, carefully.
8. The ld. counsel for the complainant has argued that the complainant has been availing  agricultural credit facility of HDFC Bank quite for some time  and he approached the Branch Manager of OPs for extension of credit limit. The OPs have agreed to extend this facility but at that time they mislead the complainant and the OPs got signatures of the complainant on some blank papers and they issued the policy and Rs.50,000/-was deducted from the account of the complainant. The complainant never took any policy and as such Rs.50,000/- be got refunded.
9. On the other hand, the ld. counsel for OPs No.1,3&4 has argued that the complainant took the policy and he paid Rs.50,000/-as premium. The ld. counsel further argued that they have mentioned in the written reply that they are willing to refund the amount provided the complainant submitted the required documents  to satisfy IRDA in the refund case.
10. To prove this case, the complainant tendered his affidavit, Ex.CA and he has deposed as per the complaint. Ex.C1 is the policy of HDFC Life, Ex.C2 is letter, Ex.C3 is also letter, Ex.C4 is legal notice, Ex.C5 is postal receipt, Ex.C6 is document of HDFC Bank, Ex.C7 is out patient card of PGI, Chandigarh.
11. On the other hand Arpit, Manager Legal has tendered his affidavit, Ex.OPA and he has deposed as per the written reply,Ex.OP1 is authority letter.
12. The complainant has filed this complaint for refund of Rs.50,000/- on the ground that his consent was not taken while issuing the policy. In the written statement, filed by the OPs, in para no.8 of the written statement, it is stated that the OPs are willing to refund Rs.50,000/- but without interest.
13. As the OPs have stated that they are ready to refund Rs.50,000/-, accordingly the complaint stands allowed and the OPs are directed to refund the amount of Rs.50,000/-to the complainant alongwith interest @4% per annum from the date the amount was debited till payment, with no order as to costs.   

Compliance of the order be made by the OPs within a period of 45 days from the date of the receipt of the certified copy of this order.

ANNOUNCED

DATED:17.9.2021

                                   Dr.Harman Shergill Sullar        Jasjit Singh Bhinder

                                           Member                                        President