Date of Filing: 16-06-2015 Date of Final Order: 25-11-2016
Smt. Runa Ganguly, President in-charge.
The brief facts of the present case is that the Complainant applied for an online term policy with ICICI Prudential on 01/08/2013 for life coverage of Rs.75 lacs along with an Accidental Rider benefit of Rs.50 lacs for the period of 20 years. The said policy bearing No.17965598 was recommended by Policy Bazar.Com i.e. the O.P. No.3. After getting the down loaded form, the Complainant observed that there are some manipulations in personal information and in exclusion clause of Accidental Rider benefit. Thereafter, the Complainant brought the matter to the notice of the O.Ps, ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Co. Ltd., over mail on 03/08/2013 & 04/08/2013 but the O.P did not pay any heed towards it. The above policy was issued on 08/08/2013 in the name of the Complainant but the Complainant noticed that the said policy issued without Rider benefit (Rs.50 lacs) though the Complainant make proposal with Accidental Rider option.
The Complainant corresponded several times to the O.Ps for settled his dispute but the concern authority i.e. the O.Ps did not pay any heed to the Complainant. After a long period, the company’s representative communicated with the Complainant for a new policy of Rs.75 lacs along with Rs.50 lacs accidental benefit and demanded Rs.4,000/- as additional charge. The Complainant refused to pay Rs.4,000/- and requested to the O.Ps to consider the matter by calculating the premium amount from the date when policy issued i.e. on 07/08/2013. The O.Ps did not consider the said request. In this situation, the Complainant intended to get refund the said money. The O.Ps with ill motive did not send the policy certificate to the residence of the Complainant. Due to such action and inaction of the O.Ps, the Complainant suffered pecuniary loss as well as mental pain and agonies. Finding no other alternative, the Complainant filed the present case praying for reliefs as incorporated in the prayer portion of the complaint.
The O.P. No.1 & 2 are contesting the case through the Ld. Agent and contending inter-alia that the present case is not maintainable in its present Form as well as in law. The O.P. No.1 & 2 also averred that in the present case the deficiency of the O.Ps as alleged by the Complainant cannot be decided without examination and cross examination of witness. This proceeding before the Forum is summary in nature and this dispute cannot be decided before this Forum and the Complainant should seek Redress of his grievances before Civil Court. The dispute raised by the Complainant is not a “Consumer Dispute” as per C.P. Act, 1986 for which the complaint petition must be rejected. The O.Ps further contended that the Complainant applied for purchasing online product “ICICI Pru I Care RP option I (T31)” and the Complainant offered to pay a premium of Rs.21,300/- annually towards the said premium and after evaluation and processed the proposal form on the basis of information provided by the Complainant, the O.Ps issued policy bearing No.17965598 on 07/08/2013 and the same was dispatched to the Complainant on 08/08/2013 through e-mail provided by the Complainant. The Complainant received the same. As per Clause 6 (2) & 4 (1) the Complainant had opportunity of 15 days free look period for review/cancellation the policy but the Complainant did not raise any objection regarding the issued policy. Thus, the policy admitted by the Complainant. As per terms & conditions of the said policy the Complainant had to pay the premium of Rs.21,300/- annually for premium payment term of 20 years.
Further, the O.Ps issued the policy as per the consent and declarations dated 01/08/2013 duly signed by the Complainant. After receiving the said policy, the Complainant requested the O.Ps on 04/08/2013 to add accidental rider benefit in the issued policy though he did not choose the accidental rider check box. After receiving repeated request from the side of the Complainant, the O.Ps vide its letter dated 19/02/2014 asked the Complainant to provide his consent for the product change and complete the product change document requirements. However, the Complainant did not provide his consent for the product change. The policy opted by the Complainant does not have the option of life coverage along with accidental rider benefit.
The further averment of the O.Ps is that being a reputed company, the O.Ps never harassed the Complainant. There is no other option to give the Complainant to provide the facility of the accidental rider benefit as desire of the Complainant rather the Complainant had an option in free look period to refuse the policy and then choose the appropriate policy, he wanted to obtain but he did not do that. Thus, this answering O.Ps have no deficiency in service.
Putting all this, the O.Ps prayed for dismissal of the present complaint as they have no deficiency in service.
It appears that in spite of due service of Notice upon the O.P. No.3, Paritosh Arora, Operation Manager of Policy Bazar, Gurgaon did not turn up before the Forum and accordingly the present case proceeded in Ex-parte against him.
In the light of the contention of the Complainant and the O.P. No.1 & 2, the following points necessarily came up for consideration.
POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION
- Is the Complainant a Consumer as per Section 2(1)(d)(ii) of the C.P. Act, 1986?
- Has this Forum jurisdiction to entertain the instant complaint?
- Have the Opposite Parties any deficiency in service and are they liable in any way?
- Whether the Complainant is entitled to get relief/reliefs as prayed for?
DECISION WITH REASONS
We have gone through the record very carefully, perused the entire documents in the record also heard the argument at a length as advanced by the Opposite Party as because the Complainant remain absent on so many dates also absent on the date of argument.
Point No.1.
The Complainant obtained a policy against certain payment from the O.P, ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Co. Ltd., and O.P issued a policy bearing No.17965598 dated 07/08/2013. Thus, invariably the Complainant is a “Consumer” of the O.Ps in terms of the provision of section 2(1)(d)(ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
Point No.2.
Though the Office & Place of Business of the O.Ps are beyond the jurisdiction of this Forum but the cause of action arose in this district. Thus, in terms of section 11 (1)(c) of C.P. Act, 1986 this forum has jurisdiction to try the present case. The value of the case is within the limit of Rs.20,000,00/- so, this Forum has also pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the instant case.
Point No.3 & 4.
It is the case of the Complainant that in desire to obtain a policy from ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Co. Ltd., the Complainant made a proposal to the O.P Company through online. After completion all formalities, the Complainant received policy bearing No.17965598 dated 07/08/2013 from the end of the O.Ps. The Complainant applied for “ICICI Pru I Care RP option I (T31))” of a premium of Rs.21,300/- amicably under the said plan for life coverage of Rs.75 lac for term of 20 years.
The dispute of the present case is that the Complainant after receiving the said policy noticed that the policy issued by the O.Ps without Accidental Rider Benefit and being astonished he requested to the O.Ps for adding accidental rider benefit in the said policy but the O.Ps did not pay any heed towards it for which this present case is filed by the Complainant.
It is the case of the O.Ps that as per policy proposal made by the Complainant through online the policy bearing No.17965598 dated 07/08/2013 issued by the O.Ps after completion of all necessary formalities. After expiring of free look period, the Complainant requested the O.Ps for additional facility in his policy i.e. accidental rider benefit though in proposal form he did not choose the said option in his policy. O.Ps asked the Complainant for further payment for fresh policy with accidental rider benefit but the Complainant not agreed with for which the O.Ps have nothing to do and also they have no deficiency in service.
We have gone through the record very carefully also heard the argument as advanced by the Ld. Agent for the O.Ps.
It appears from the record that the Complainant remain absent on three consecutive dates. On the date of argument, the Complainant was not present for which daily order passed for disposal of the case on merit.
Annexure 1-7 files by the Complainant go to show that the Complainant opted the policy in his own choice through online vide online application OL10102590 and made a proposal to the O.Ps for obtaining ICICI Pru I care RP Option I (T31) policy. After receiving the amount of Rs. 21,300/-for the particular ICICI Pru I care RP Option I (T31) policy, the O.Ps after completion all formalities issued the policy in the name of the Complainant bearing policy No.17965598 dated 07/08/2013. On meticulous scrutiny of the documents filed by the Complainant go to show that in proposal, the Complainant never prayed for accidental rider benefit he only prayed for ICICI Pru I care RP Option I. The communication through e-mail dated 04.08.2013 to the O.Ps the Complainant frankly stated that he failed to select the accidental rider check box, for which he cannot claim for the same. The Complainant also did not accept the offer of the O.Ps for obtaining the accidental rider benefit by making some additional payment.
In the light of the foregoing discussion and the materials to its entirety we are convinced to hold that there is no deficiency on the part of the Opposite parties in the present dispute for which the complainant cannot be compensated.
Moreover, during the pendency of the case the conduct of the Complainant is very bad. On several dates there is no appearance of the Complainant which seems that the Complainant himself very much aware about the demerits of his case. Accordingly, the present case liable to be dismissed. Further, it seems that the Complainant wasted the time of this Forum also he did not care about to show any cogent reason for which he is liable to pay cost.
Considering the facts and circumstances it appears that the present case has no merits at all and failed accordingly.
ORDER
Hence, it is ordered that,
The present Case No. CC/51/2015 be and the same is dismissed.
The Complainant is directed to pay a cost of Rs.3,000/- payable to the “CONSUMER LEGAL AID ACCOUNT ”, West Bengal for wasting valuable time of this Forum.
Let a plain copy of this Order be supplied to the parties concerned by hand/by Registered Post with A/D forthwith, free of cost, for information & necessary action, as per rules.
Dictated and corrected by me.
