Sri Iswar Chandra Pradhan filed a consumer case on 24 Feb 2023 against The Branch Manager in the Kendujhar Consumer Court. The case no is CC/10/2021 and the judgment uploaded on 18 Mar 2023.
DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KEONJHAR
CONSUMER COMPLAINT CASE NO 10 of 2021
Sri Iswar Chandra Pradhan, aged about 49 years,
S/O-Late Trilochan Pradhan resided at-Satasinga,
D.D-College Road, Baniapat, P.O-Keonjhargarh,
P.S-Town, District-Keonjhar,
Odisha-758001, ……..………………………………………………Complainant
Versus
Branch Office At-Reliance Securities Limited,
Near Ram Mandir, Mining Road, P.O-Keonjhargarh,
P.S-Town, District-Keonjhar-758001.
Registered and Corporate Office At-5th Floor,
Reliance Centre, Off western Express Highway,
Santacruz(East), Mumbai,
Maharastra-400055……………………..……………….………………… Opp. Parties
Present:
Sri B.N.Patra, President
Sri. J.K.Behera, Member I/C
Advocate for complainant- Nihar Ranjan Mishra
Advocate for O.Ps 1 & 2 – Chinmaya Patra
Date of filing - 01.03.2021 Date of order -24.02.2023
B.N Patra (President)
Brief facts of the case is that the complainant had purchased a term life insurance policy including Health Insurance Plan worth of Rs 35,00,00/- and critical illness rider health insurance for four members of his family worth of Rs 10,00,000/- vide policy No-538,6558 on Dtd 17.11.20 for minimum term coverage up to attaining 75 years of age. He had paid a single premium of Rs 35,024/- and premium paying term is 10 years. The complainant only received the policy documents, but when asked for health card and health policy details the Ops did not supply it. But till date only health policy details are received by complainant. The concerned agent told that the policy has been cancelled. The cause of action arose on 22.2.21.The complainant prays to return the premium from Ops an amount of Rs 36,759 and Rs 1,00,000/- for mental agony with cost of litigation.
The complainant relies on the following documents.
In the above situation the case is admitted & notice issued to Ops. But one interim order passed vide I.A No 1 of 2022 restraining Ops not to debit money them complaint’s account. After receiving the order Ops appeared and filed their written version. Ops strongly denies the complaint. The Ops objected that it is a false allegation of negligence and deficiency of service without any basis just to waste valuable time complainant has harassed and defamed the Opp Party.
It is admitted that the complainant had purchased a policy known as Reliance Nippon Life Increasing Income Insurance Plan having policy No-53816538 and the policy holder had paid a single premium amount of Rs 35,024. Mode of payment is yearly for 10 years. Policy issued on 15.11.2020 and the complainant received the documents on dt 19.12.2020.There was a free look period of 15 days after receipt of policy bond to cancelled the scheme. But the policy holder has not exercised the facility. 17th Nov 21 was the date of premium payment but policy holder did not pay it for which the policy was lapsed as per policy terms and condition and nothing will be paid to complainant as per rules.
Ops has relied on the following documents.
1Proposal form (Photocopy). Annexure series 1
Under the above situation following points are to be determined before deciding the case.
It is revealed from the case record that the complainant has deposited a single premium and company sent policy documents with policy bond. But question arises when the company did not issue health card and health policy details. But Ops submitted that that all details regarding policy have been sent. Due to non deposit of next yearly premium, the policy has been cancelled and the question of returning deposit money does not arise. Here question arises why company did not issue health card. But it is a fact that policy bond and policy details have been issued. The company has not kept the health bond without issuing it. When the complainant pressurized they did not answer it, for which the complainant did not deposit the next premium. Here deficiency of service by Ops does not arise as this company carry business under the rules and regulation of IRDA. The complainant has not cancelled the policy within 15 days of receipt of bond. So question of return of payment does not arise. The complainant has not made any claim under the policy. As per citation in LIC of India & others Vs N.P Nagarathna CPR-2012(2) (NC) “An insurance policy between two parties is based on utmost good faith and breach of the same would justify cancellation by insurance claim”.
So in this situation Ops have not made any deficiency of service and cause of action does not arise in this case. The complainant is not entitled to get any relief. So the case is not maintainable.
Order
The complainant case being devoid of merits is dismissed. Parties are to bear their own cost.
Pronounced the order in open Commission today i.e. on dt. 24.02.2023.
Free copy be supplied to parties, if applied for.
I agree
( Sri J. K. Behera) ( B.N. Patra )
Member,I/C (President)
DCDRC, Keonjhar DCDRC, Keonjhar
Dictated & Corrected by me.
( B.N. Patra ) (President)
DCDRC, Keonjhar
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.