Punjab

Faridkot

CC/16/279

Sukhwinder Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Manager Axis Bank Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

A.S. Sekhon

04 May 2017

ORDER

 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, FARIDKOT

 

Complaint No. :     279

Date of Institution: 30.09.2016

Date of Decision :   4.05.2017

 

Sukhwinder Singh aged 38 years, s/o Sh Harphool Singh r/o Village Ghugiana Tehsil and District Faridkot.

                                                                                        ...Complainant

Versus

 

1. The Manager, Axis Bank Ltd, Branch Office, Faridkot.
2. Satinder Verma c/o Axis Bank Ltd. Jind (Haryana).
3. Managing Director and C E O, 11^th Floor, DLF Square, Jacaranda Marg, DLF Phase II, Gurgaon-122002.

                              .......Ops

Complaint under Section 12 of the

Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

Quorum: Sh. Ajit Aggarwal, President,

                Sh P Singla, Member.

 

Present: Sh A S Sekhon, Ld Counsel for complainant,

              Sh Sandeep Tayal, Ld Counsel for OP-1.

              Sh Gurtaj Sandhu, Ld Counsel for OP-2.

              Sh Rahul Chaudhary, Ld Counsel for OP-3.

 

ORDER

(Ajit Aggarwal, President)

                                          Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against OPs seeking directions to OPs to make payment of Rs. 40,000/- and for further directing OPs to pay Rs. 4 lacs as compensation for harassment, inconvenience, mental agony besides Rs.5,000/- as litigation expenses.

2                                            Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that complainant is a poor illiterate person and he is having saving account bearing no.910010012948348 with OP-1, who is agent of Ops and OP-2 was looking for the business of Max New York Life Insurance Co. While sitting in the office of OP-1. It is submitted that on 1.10.2011, complainant alongwith his father went to Bank for depositing Rs.1,00,000/-in his saving account and there both OP-1 and 2 convinced complainant to sign some papers and then, his insurance will be done free. They convinced him that for insurance he would have to pay nothing and then both OP-1 and 2 put so much pressure on complainant and got his signatures and advised him that after 12 years, he will get considerable money from Max New York

 

Life Insurance Com, but they never disclosed him that they debited Rs.20,000/-from his saving account as premium. Again in September/October 2012, Ops forced him to pay the premium amount otherwise his policy would lapse. When complainant refused to make payment of premium amount as it was a free policy, they told him that his policy would lapse and he will also not get refund of amount deposited by him and then, under compelling circumstances, complainant deposited Rs.20,000/-with them. After that complainant made several requests to Ops to make refund of his amount, but they refused to hear his requests. Complainant also served legal notice to Ops requesting them to make payment of his amount deposited with them, but all in vain. All this amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice on the part of OPs and has caused harassment and mental agony to him. He has prayed for directions to Ops to pay Rs.4,00,000/- as compensation and Rs.5,000/- as cost of litigation besides the main relief. Hence, the present complaint.

3                                             The counsel for complainant was heard with regard to admission of the complaint and vide order dated 10.10.2016, complaint was admitted and notice was ordered to be issued to the opposite party.

4                                            On receipt of the notice, OP-1 filed reply taking preliminary objections that present complaint is not maintainable as complainant is not the consumer of answering OP as they have charged no amount from him and complainant has impleaded them unnecessarily. Moreover, complaint in hand is time barred as last premium was paid in 2012 and no cause of action arises against answering OP. It is averred that answering OP acted only as a facilitator between complainant and OP-3 and actual insurance is issued by OP-3. Even this Forum has no jurisdiction to decide the present complaint and it is further averred that complainant has concealed the material fact from this Forum and has not come to the Forum with clean hands. However, on merits, OP-1 has denied all the allegations levelled by complainant being wrong and incorrect and asserted that complainant has concocted a false story as he himself approached answering OP for taking insurance policy of Op-3 and OP-1 and OP-2 disclosed all the terms and conditions of the policy to complainant and after knowing all the terms and conditions of insurance policy, he agreed to purchase the insurance policy in question and on his request, demand draft of Rs.20,000/- was issued in the name of OP-3 from the account of complainant. It is further averred that OP-1 and 2 never persuaded complainant to purchase the policy in question and moreover, OP-2 was transferred from Faridkot on 17.07.2012 and thus, question of persuading the complainant does not arise at all. It is further averred that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP-1 and all the other allegations levelled have been denied being wrong and incorrect and prayed that complaint deserves to be dismissed with costs.

5                                                 On receipt of notice, Op-2 also filed reply and took similar pleadings as taken by OP-1 in his reply. OP-2 has also denied all the allegations of complainant being wrong and incurred and reiterated that there is no deficiency in service on his part. He has prayed for dismissal of compliant with costs.

6                                               Op-3 filed reply taking preliminary objections that complainant has concealed the material facts from this Forum and has not come to the Forum with clean hands and moreover, complaint filed by him is time barred as complainant has alleged that the paid last instalment in 2012 and thus, after a lapse of 4 years, the complainant has no cause of action of filing the present complaint and therefore, it is liable to be dismissed. However, on merits, OP-3 has denied all the allegations levelled by complainant being wrong, incorrect and false and prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.

7                                                    Parties were given proper opportunities to prove their respective case. The complainant tendered in evidence his affidavit Ex.C-1 and documents Ex C-2 to C-14 and then, closed his evidence.

8                                         In order to rebut the evidence of the complainant, Ld Counsel for OP-1 tendered in evidence, affidavit of Manish Aggarwal as Ex OP-1, document Ex OP-2 and then, closed the evidence. Counsel for OP-2 tendered in evidence copy of e-mail as Ex OP-2/2 and closed the same. Counsel for Op-3 tendered in evidence  affidavit of Gurvinder Singh as Ex OP-3/1, document Ex OP-3/2 and closed same on behalf of OP-3.

9                                         We have heard the arguments addressed by all the parties and have also gone through the evidence and documents led by the parties.

10                                  Ld Counsel for complainant argued that complainant is a poor illiterate person and he is having saving account with OP-1, who is agent of Ops and OP-2 was looking for the business of Max New York Life Insurance Company while sitting in the office of OP-1. It is submitted that on 1.10.2011, complainant alongwith his father went to Bank for depositing Rs.1,00,000/-in his saving account and there both OP-1 and 2 convinced him to sign some papers and then, his insurance will be done free. They convinced him that for insurance he would have to pay nothing and then both OP-1 and 2 put so much pressure on complainant and got his signatures and advised him that after 12 years, he will get considerable money from Max New York Life Insurance Com, but they never disclosed him that they debited Rs.20,000/-from his saving account as premium. Again in September/October 2012, Ops forced him to pay the premium amount otherwise his policy would lapse. When complainant refused to make payment of premium amount as it was a free policy, they told him that his policy would lapse and he will also not get refund of amount deposited by him and then, under compelling circumstances, complainant deposited Rs.20,000/-with them. After that complainant made several requests to Ops to make refund of his amount, but they refused to hear his requests. Complainant also served legal notice to Ops requesting them to make payment of his amount deposited with them, but all in vain, which amounts to deficiency in service and trade mal practice on the part of OPs and has caused harassment and mental agony to him. He has prayed for accepting the complaint.

11                            To controvert the  arguments of complainant counsel, ld counsel for Ops argued that present complaint is not maintainable as complainant is not the consumer of OP-1 as they have charged no amount from complainant and he has impleaded them unnecessarily. Moreover, complaint in hand is time barred as last premium was paid in 2012 and no cause of action arises against them. It is averred that OP-1 acted only as a facilitator between complainant and OP-3 and actual insurance is issued by OP-3. It is asserted that this Forum has no jurisdiction to decide the present complaint and complainant has concealed the material fact from this Forum and has not come to the Forum with clean hands. OP-1 has denied all the allegations levelled by complainant being wrong and incorrect and asserted that complainant has concocted a false story as he himself approached OP-1 for taking insurance policy of Op-3 and OP-1 and OP-2 disclosed all the terms and conditions of the policy to complainant and after knowing and fully considering all the terms and conditions of insurance policy, he agreed to purchase the same and on his request, demand draft of Rs.20,000/- was issued in the name of OP-3 from the account of complainant. It is further averred that OP-1 and 2 never persuaded complainant to purchase the policy in question and moreover, OP-2 was transferred from Faridkot on 17.07.2012 and thus, question of persuading the complainant does not arise at all. It is further averred that there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP-1 and all the other allegations levelled have been denied being wrong and incorrect and prayed that complaint deserves to be dismissed with costs.

12                                                 Ld Counsel for OP-2 has also denied all the allegations of complainant being wrong and incurred and reiterated that there is no deficiency in service on his part and asserted that he was transferred from Faridkot on on 17.07.2012 and thus, question of persuading the complainant does not arise at all. He has prayed for dismissal of compliant with costs.

13                                          Ld Counsel for OP-3 argued before the Forum that complainant has concealed the material facts from this Forum and has not come to the Forum with clean hands and moreover, complaint filed by him is time barred as complainant has alleged that the paid last instalment in 2012 and thus, after a lapse of 4 years, the complainant has no cause of action of filing the present complaint and therefore, it is liable to be dismissed. OP-3 has denied all the allegations levelled by complainant being wrong, incorrect and false and prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.

14                                             We have carefully gone through the file and from the  above discussion, it is observed that case of complainant is that OP-1 and  2 persuaded him to purchase the insurance policy of OP-3, which is free of cost and got signatures of complainant on some blank papers and  later on, they themselves debited Rs.20,000/-on account of premium of insurance policy. When complainant requested him to refund his amount they threatened him that his policy would lapse and he will gain nothing. They also forced him to pay second premium for insurance policy in question, which amounts to deficiency in service. He has prayed for directions to Ops to refund his entire amount deposited by him with Ops with interest. In reply, all the Ops have denied all the allegations of complainant being wrong, incorrect and concocted ones and asserted that there is no deficiency in service on their part. OP-1 stressed that complainant himself wanted to purchase an insurance policy and for this purpose he came to him and being facilitator, OP-1 and 2 explained and disclosed all the terms and conditions of Policy to complainant and after fully understanding and considering the terms and conditions of Insurance Policy, complainant agreed to purchase the policy in question and thereafter only after his consent and his approval, demand draft was issued in favour of Op-3. It is further averred that OP-1 is only a facilitator and actual policy is issued by OP-3. OP-2 has denied all the allegations asserting that he was transferred from Faridkot on 17.02.2012 i.e before the purchase of policy by complainant and how can he persuade or force the complainant to purchase the said policy. OP-3 asserted that complainant purchased the policy in question after considering all the terms and conditions of policy and he himself issued demand draft in favour of OP-3 in lieu of premium of Insurance Policy.

15                               From the careful perusal of record placed on file and going through the above discussion, this Forum is of considered opinion that there is no deficiency in service on the part of Ops as complainant himself agreed to purchase the policy in question and paid demand draft wilfully without any persuasion or pressure. He paid two premiums and it cannot be presumed that he was persuaded or forced by Ops to pay premium for second time also. Even if he was not satisfied with the policy, he could avail free look period and could make request for cancellation of policy and for refund of his money. Moreover, he remained silent for more than 4 years and even did not file any application or request letter to Ops regarding cancellation or refund of his money and now, after so many years, he has raised allegations on Ops regarding deficiency in service. There is no application or letter on record by complainant regarding withdrawal, cancellation or refund of his money to prove his pleadings. Therefore, he cannot be granted benefit of his own delay. Therefore, complaint in hand is hereby dismissed being time barred. However, Ops are directed to refund surrender value of Insurance Policy in question as per instructions issued by I. R. D. A.  In peculiar circumstances of complaint case, there are no orders as to costs. Copy of order be given to parties free of cost under rules. File be consigned to record room.

Announced in Open Forum

Dated : 4.05.2017         

 

  Member                            President

                                                  (P Singla)                      (Ajit Aggarwal)

         

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                            Complaint No. :     279/2016

 

                Sukhwinder Singh          Vs           Axis Bank.

 

 

Present: Sh A S Sekhon, Ld Counsel for complainant,

              Sh Sandeep Tayal, Ld Counsel for OP-1.

              Sh Gurtaj Sandhu, Ld Counsel for OP-2.

              Sh Rahul Chaudhary, Ld Counsel for OP-3.

              Arguments heard. Vide our separate detailed order of even date, complaint in hand is hereby allowed. Therefore, complaint in hand is hereby dismissed being time barred. However, Ops are directed to refund the surrender value of insurance policy in question as per IRDA instructions. In peculiar circumstances of the complaint case, there are no orders as to costs. Copy of order be given to parties free of cost under rules. File be consigned to record room.

Announced in Open Forum

Dated : 4.05.2017         

 

  Member                            President