DATE OF FILING : 19-06-2012.
DATE OF S/R : 19-07-2012.
DATE OF FINAL ORDER : 31-10-2012.
Sri Sudeep Kumar Chakraborti,
son of Sri Jagannath Chakraborti,
residing at 28/1, Biharilal Chakraborty Lane,
3rd Floor, P.O. & P.S. & District –Howrah,
PIN – 711 101.------------------------------------------------------------ COMPLAINANT.
- Versus -
1. The General Manager,
Max New York Life Insurance Co. Ltd.,
having its operation centre at 90, A, Udyog Vihar,
Sector – 18, Gurgaon – 122 015, Haryana and
also registered office at Max House ( 3rd floor ),
1, Dr. Jha Marg, Okhia,
New Delhi – 110 020,
India.
2. The General Manager,
Amway India Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.
Having its registered office at Plot No. 5,
DDA Local Shoping Centre, Okhia Commercial Comples,
Phase – II, New Delhi – 110020
And also at plot no. 8, 1st floor,
Elegance Tower, Non Hierarchical Commercial Centre,
Jasola, New Delhi – 110 025.
3. The Manager,
Max New York Life Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Having its office at 15A, Hemanta Basu Sarani,
Continental Chamver ( 3rd floor ),
Kolkata – 700 001.-------------------------------------------------OPPOSITE PARTIES.
P R E S E N T
President : Shri T.K. Bhattacharya, M.A. LL.B. WBHJS.
Member : Shri P.K. Chatterjee.
Member : Smt. Jhumki Saha.
F I N A L O R D E R
1. The instant case was filed by complainant U/S 12 of the C.P. Act, 1986,
as amended against the O.Ps. alleging deficiency in service U/S 2( 1 )( g ), 2( 1 )( o ) of the C.P. Act, 1986 wherein the complainant, Sudeep Kumar Chakraborti has prayed for direction upon the O.Ps. to recall the demand of the amount of Rs. 9,875/- as premium due and to activate the policy of the complainant with effect from the date of initiation and to refund the entire premium as paid by the complainant together with the compoundable interest @ 12% per annum by closing the policy for ever and for compensation to the tune of Rs. 10,00,000/- for mental pain and agony and for litigation costs.
2. The complainant, a policy holder under the o.p. no. 1 vide policy no.
614582062 since 24-10-2008 for a term of 20 years, sum assured being Rs. 1 lac, with annual target premium of Rs. 10,000/-, used to pay insurance premium regularly against receipts from the o.ps. dated 30th December, 2011. Unfortunately on 22-01-2012 the complainant received one letter from the Chief Manager of the o.p. no. 1 ( Max New York Life Insurance Company Ltd. ) intimating the receipt of the last premium of Rs. 11,576/- and informing that the amount was lying unallocated as it was not sufficient for reinstatement of the complainant’s policy and the policy was to continue in ‘lapse mode’. The complainant to his utter dismay contacted the office of the o.p. no. 3 and came to learn that the premium due amounting to Rs. 9,875/- has rendered the policy in ‘lapse condition’ since 2010 for nonpayment of the said premium. The complainant filed this complaint for gross unfair trade practice and deficiency in service.
3. The o.p. nos. 1 & 2 in their written statement contended interalia that on
18-02-2010 a refund of Rs. 9,875/- from the policy was sent to the complainant / customer by cheque no. 770924 and the same was encashed on 20-04-2010 ; that for such refund to the complainant the policy went into ‘lapse mode’ and could not be reinstated as the allocated premium was short ; that the complainant on 03-02-2012 visited the branch office and enquired into the matter for refund of the money ; that the complainant was explained that the refund of Rs. 9,875/- was not due to him ; that the same was refunded to him inadvertently; that there occurred no deficiency in service ; that the o.ps. are ready to continue the policy if the refunded money of Rs. 9,875/- is deposited to the o.ps. So the complaint is liable to be dismissed.
4. Upon pleadings of both parties two points arose for determination :
i) Is there any deficiency in service on the part of the O.Ps. ?
ii) Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief as prayed for ?
DECISION WITH REASONS :
5. Both the points are taken up together for consideration. Admittedly the complainant paid the yearly premium regularly till 30th December, 2011. The enclosures confirmed that the complainant has a valid policy since 24-10-2008. The entire dispute was triggered by the deliberate ploy at the behest of the o.ps. when they sent a cheque being no. 770924 dated 18-02-2010 for a sum of Rs. 9,875/- to the complainant in the garb of refund. The o.ps. knew fully well that no refund of identical amount can be due to the complainant who has initiated the policy only on 24-10-2008. I am constrained to hold that the o.p. insurance company deviced a very well calculated plan to dislodge the policy holder from his bonafide claim. The sum that did not accrue to his credit was sent to him through a cheque only to create faith and confidence about the apparent honesty of the o.p. company only to grab the hitherto deposited premium in the garb of ‘lapse mode’ definition. The o.ps. in their written version in para 3 (VII) has admitted that the refund was made inadvertently. We are sure that this disclosure is with the gesture only to hoodwink the consumers as well as the Forum. Had it been refunded inadvertently, the o.ps. would not have admitted their fault after lapse of nearly two years 8 months and that too after the filing of the complaint by the complainant.
6. That the complainant was bewildered after receiving the so-called refund cheque dated 18-02-2010 is well reflected from the conduct of the complainant. The cheque was received in the month of Feb’10 and the same was encashed after lapse of two months. The complainant himself stated before the Forum that after receiving the cheque he rushed to the office of the o.p. no. 1. They assured him verbally that the same cheque was due to him and nothing to worry. Had the complainant been greedy he would have encashed the cheque then and there without lapse of further time. Instead he encashed it after two months presumably on being assured by the o.p. insurance company. In between these two months after the issue of the cheque in dispute and even in between 2 years and 8 months the o.p. company had no time and opportunity to clarify the same to the complainant that it was wrongly issued to the complainant through bonafide mistake. Instead they terrorized the complainant by sending the letter dated 22-01-2012 that his policy has been placed in ‘lapse mode’ in spite of the last payment of premium on 30th December, 2011.
7. We have no hesitation in our mind that the o.p. insurance company very tactfully deviced the ploy to confuse a bonafide customer and to place him in utter psychic torpor. This comes definitely within the definition of unfair trade practice and gross deficiency in service within the meaning of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The o.p. insurance company cannot have any respite from the rigours of law as they deliberately confused the complainant and placed him in total mental disarray with respect to his dream policy for his only daughter. He is now totally frustrated with the company and it is very natural that a frustrated consumer shall never step into the same office for depositing further premium even if it is regularized. That the assurance of the o.p. company is very volatile, is further established from their letter dated 18-06-2012 in which the shortfall premium suddenly changed its hue from Rs. 9,875/- to Rs. 11,774/-. If the refund of the cheque dated 18-02-2010 was sent to the complainant inadvertently, what steps the o.p. company took against the erring assistant who had thrown the smooth running insurance policy to a total disarray situation.
We are, therefore, of the view that this is a fit case where the prayer of the complainant shall be granted. The o.p. company cannot have any escape from the rigours of law. Points under consideration are accordingly decided.
Hence,
O R D E R E D
That the C. C. Case No. 63 of 2012 ( HDF 63 of 2012 ) be allowed on contest with costs against all the O.Ps.
The O.Ps. be directed to recall the demand of the amount of Rs. 9,875/-as premium due and to activate the policy being no. 614582062 dated 24-10-2008 of the complainant with effect from the date of initiation.
The o.ps. be directed to refund the entire premium as paid by the complainant year by year till 30-12-2011 with compoundable interest @ 12% per annum by closing the policy for ever.
The complainant is entitled to a compensation and damages to the tune of Rs. 3,00,000/- for mental pain, agony and prolonged sufferings caused by the o.ps. insurance company.
The complainant is further entitled to the litigation costs to the tune of Rs. 5,000/-.
The o.ps. be directed to pay the amount as above to the complainant within 30 days from the date of this order failing the total amount inclusive of the premium amount shall carry interest @ 12% per annum till full satisfaction.
The complainant is at liberty to put the decree into execution after expiry of the appeal period.
Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.
