Hon'ble Mr. Subhas Ch. Guin, Member.

The sum and substance of the complaint petition is that Mr. Chandan Saha who a resident of Balarampur Road, Dinhata, Ward No.5, P.O. & P.S. Dinhata, Dist- Cooch Behar took home loan from ICICI Bank, Dinhata Branch Dist- Cooch Behar(O.P. NO.1) amounting to Rs.15,63,073/- and Rs.6,00,000/- on 03.12.21 and 18.01.2022 respectively by mortgaging his house property. On 13.12.21 the O.P. No.1 bank father sanctioned a sum of Rs.1,02,401/- as loan for payment of one time premium towards life coverage(Mortgage Insurance) of the borrower Mr. Chandan Saha to indemnify the whole above said loan in case of death of said borrower. One time premium of Rs.1,02,401/- was paid to the ICICI Prudential Life Insurance having its Branch Office at Ward No.8, Main Road, P.O. Dinhata, Dist- Cooch Behar(O.P. No.2) for purchasing the policy named ICICI Pru Super protect credit vide application No.OC6286085JJ0201 but the O.P. No.2 did not hand over any policy deed for the mortgage insurance in favour of Mr. Chandan Saha.

Unfortunately, the said borrower Mr. Chandan Saha died of Covid-19 on 30.01.2022 and the intimation of his death was given to both O.Ps by deceased’s wife Mrs. Jharna Saha on 04.02.2022. Now it is the responsibility of the O.P. No.1 bank to recover all outstanding amount with respect to the abovesaid loan of the deceased Chandan Saha from the O.P. No.2, ICICI Prudential Life Insurance as there was mortgage insurance in favour of Mr. Chandan Saha. But it is surprising to note that the O.P. No.2 without indemnifying the said loan sent a message on 12.03.2022 through email of the deceased’s business establishment named Chandan Electronics stating that the above mortgage insurance policy was cancelled due to failure to fulfil the important requirements. On the other hand, this O.P. No.2 received the premium for the mortgage insurance on 13.12.21. Thus by cancelling the mortgage insurance the O.P. No.2 tried to avoid the payment of the sum assured towards adjustment of the loan amount.

Thereafter, the O.P. No.2 reversed the premium amount of the said policy to the O.P. No.1 and consequently the O.P. No.1 was demanding EMI of the home loan from the Complainant by avoiding recovery of the said loan from the O.P. No.2 as the O.P. No.2 insured the loan amount by receiving the premium of the mortgage insurance. This activities of the O.Ps amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on their part as claimed by the Complainants.

On sad demise of the borrower Mr. Chandan Saha his wife Mrs. Jharna Saha, Complainant No.1 son Mr. Sourav Saha, Complainant No.2 and Mr. Bishal Saha, Complainant No.3 filed this instant case finding no other alternative for redressal of their grievances. The cause of action of this case arose on 13.12.2021, 12.03.2022 and continued till date which is within jurisdiction of this Commission. So they prayed for a direction to O.P. No.1 to realise the loan amount of Rs.21,63,073/- from the O.P. NO.2 against the mortgage policy or to the O.P. No.2 to indemnify the entire loan amount to her and his two sons. They also prayed for a compensation of Rs.1,50,000/- for mental pain and agony and Rs.1,50,000/- for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice and to refund the EMIs already paid after the death of the borrower.

Summons were served upon the O.Ps. Despite service of summon from this Commission O.Ps did not appear before the Commission to contest the case. So the instant case was decided to be heard ex-parte against O.Ps.

Decision with reasons

The Complainants in order to establish the claim adduced evidence on affidavit and documents before this Commission.

Perused the pleadings of the Complainant and the documents in the case record. Heard the argument advanced by the Ld. Advocate for the Complainants. The statements made in the evidence on affidavit are absolutely in consonance with the averments made in the complaint petition.

The O.Ps did not controvert the specific allegation of the Complainant in his complaint since the O.Ps decided not to contest the case and did not file any written version, evidence on affidavit and written argument.

The husband of Complainant No.1 took home loan amounting to Rs.15,63,073/- on 22.11.21 and Rs.6,00,000/- on 18.01.2022(Annexed in the complaint petition) from O.P. No.1 by mortgaging his house property. The O.P. No.1 further sanctioned Rs.1,02,401/-(Annexed in the complaint petition)  as loan for payment of one time mortgage insurance premium towards life coverage of the borrower Mr. Chandan Saha for the purpose of indemnifying the whole loan amount to the family members of the borrower in case of death of the said borrower. So one time premium of Rs.1,02,401/-(Annexed in the complaint petition)  was paid to the O.P. No.2 company on 13.12.21 which was sanctioned by the O.P. No.1 for the same purpose for purchasing ICICI Pru Super Protect Credit but no policy deed was handed over to the borrower or the Complainants. After the demise of the borrower on 30.01.2022, due information of death was given to both O.Ps by the wife of the deceased borrower considering the fact that O.P. No.2 would indemnify the whole amount of loan. But the O.P. No.2 did not indemnify the whole loan amount. On the other hand the O.P. NO.2 informed the Complainant on 12.03.2022 by a mail addressed to

ICICI Bank loan account statement for LBDIT00005873510 shows that loan amount of Rs.1,02,401/- was sanctioned on 13.12.21 by the O.P. No.1 and the same amount was disbursed to O.P. No.2 on the same date for the purchase of ICICI Pru Super Protect. So the mortgage insurance policy in favour of the borrower MR. Chandan Saha was valid from 13.12.21. On demise of the borrower on 30.01.2022, his legal heirs are entitled to get the loan amount indemnified by the O.P. No.2.

The Ld. Advocate for the Complainant cited a case law of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No.3962 of 2019 of Ashatai Vs Shriram City Union Finance Ltd in which Hon’ble Apex Court upheld the decision of District and state Commission setting aside the decision of the Hon’ble National Commission. The reliance can be placed on the abovesaid case law in which it is stated that as per section 64VB(2) of the Insurance Act the risk is covered from the date of payment of insurance premium.

Here in this instant case the premium for the mortgage insurance was paid to the insurer(ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Company) on 13.12.21 but the insurer did not issue the policy and hand over the same to the borrower even after the lapse of three months from the payment of premium. On the contrary, the O.P. No.2 company informed the borrower after his death about the cancellation of the said policy and refund of the premium of the said policy to the master policy holder(i.e. ICICI Bank Ltd.).

Thus it is admitted fact that the O.P. No.2 had received the premium of the mortgage insurance on 13.12.21 and cancelled the same on some pretext or other on 12.03.2022 just after three months. Once the premium of the policy is received by the insurer, the risk will be covered from the date of receipt of premium as per Insurance Act. These act of the O.P. No.2 tantamounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on their part.

In the light of the aforesaid discussion and observation made in the foregoing paragraphs a reasonable inference is drawn that the Complainant successfully proved the case as Consumer against the O.Ps and O.Ps are under deficiency in service as well as unfair trade practice which caused mental pain and agony to the Complainants. So the Complainants are entitled to get relief for their grievances.

Accordingly, the case of the Complainants succeeds ex-parte against the O.Ps.

Hence, it is

Ordered

That the Complainant case be and the same is allowed ex-parte against the O.Ps without cost.

Both O.Ps are held liable for the dispute in this case. So the O.P. No.1 is directed to realise the entire loan amount from the O.P. No.2 against the said mortgage insurance policy. They are also directed to refund the EMIs paid by the borrower jointly and or severally from the date of death of the borrower to till date with interest @ 6% per annum and to pay a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- for mental pain and agony and to pay a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice within one month from the date of passing this order failing which awarded sum shall carry an interest @ 6% per annum till its realisation. 

Let a plain copy of this Order be supplied to the concerned party by hand/by Registered Post with A/D forthwith, free of cost, for information & necessary action as per rule.

The copy of the Final Order is also available on www.confonet.nic.in.

Dictated and corrected by me.