IN THE COURT OF DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, DEOGARH.
C.C. Case No- 29 /2018.
Present- Sri Dipak Kumar Mahapatra, President, Smt. Jayanti Pradhan,
Member (W) and Smt. Arati Das, Member.
Mitheilal Sahu, aged about 50 years,
S/O-Late Chittaranjan Sahu,
At-Purunagarh, Ward No-8,
P.O/P.S/Dist-Deogarh. … Complainant
Versus
The Branch Manager,
Life Insurance Corporation of India.
Kuchinda Branch,
College Road Kuchinda,
P.O/P.s-Kuchinda,
Dist-Sambalpur. … Opposite Party.
For the Complainant : - Nemo
For the Opp.Parties- :- None.
DATE OF HEARING: 30.04.2019, DATE OF ORDER: 08.05.2019.
Sri Dipak Kumar Mahapatra, President-Brief facts of the case is that the Complainant on dtd.15.02.2011, being motivated by the agent of O.P availed six no. of Insurance policy termed as Endowment Plus Unit Linked Plan from the O.P. for single premium of Rs.50,000/-each and the date of maturity was 15.02.2021. As he was in need of money on dtd. 29.08.2016, he decided to close the policy prematurely and surrendered the same before the O.P for realization of money. The O.P on dtd. 29.08.2016 paid Rs.4,70,882.00/-(Rs.78,482/-each) against the policy bond to the policy holder/Complainant after deducting Rs. 9,419.00/- towards Tax Deducted at Source (TDS)which is deposited in the Central Govt. account through book adjustment. When the Complainant applied for a certificate from the O.P to file for refund of tax from
Income Tax department, the O.P has dispatched the said certificate on 25.07.2018 which the Complainant has received on dtd.26.07.2018 after the date of filling which was on dtd. 31.03.2018 for the Financial Year 2016-2017 in the Assessment Year 2017-2018 and the Complainant failed to file for tax refund, as the time limit for filling the same has been expired. The Complainant claims to be harassed by the O.P. both financially and mentally due to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice caused by him.
POINTS OF DETERMINATION:-
- Whether the Complainant is comes under the purview of Consumer Protection Act.1986?
- Whether the O.Ps has committed any Deficiency in Service to the Complainant?
From the above discussion and materials available on records we inferred that the Complainant is a consumer as he has purchased LIC policies from the O.P. The O.P. caused delay in issuing TDS certificate in favour of the Complainant as the said certificate was dispatched on dtd. 25.07.2018 and received by the Complainant on dtd.26.07.2019, when the date of filling for refund is already expired for which he could not be able to file the same with the concerned authority within the stipulated time to avail the tax benefit. Due to the negligence of the O.P the Complainant is deprived of the benefit he ought to have received as Tax refund. This matter has been well settled in the case of “State Bank of India vs. Sh. Shamsher Singh decided by State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Union Territory, Chandgiarh on 20th November, 2009. Hence the O.P has committed “Deficiency in Service” u/s 2(1)(o) under “Consumer Protection Act-1986”.
ORDER
The Complaint petition is allowed. The O.P is directed make arrangement for refund of the TDS of Rs.9419/-(Rupees Nine thousand Four hundred nineteen) only with 9% interest to the Complainant within 30(thirty days) of receiving this order. The O.P is further directed to pay Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) as compensation towards mental agony and pain and Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) towards the cost of litigation within 30 (Thirty) days of receiving of this order, failing which, the complainant is at liberty to proceed in due process of law.
Order pronounced in the open court today i.e, on 8th day of May-2019 under my hand and seal of this Forum.
Office is directed to supply copies of the Order to the parties free of costs receiving acknowledgement of the delivery thereof.
I agree, I agree,
MEMBER.(W) MEMBER. PRESIDENT.
Dictated and Corrected
By me.
PRESIDENT.
