DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM PALAKKAD

Dated this the 22^nd day of June  2013

Present : Smt.Seena H, President

            : Smt.Preetha.G. Nair, Member   

            : Smt.Bhanumathi.A.K. Member                       Date of filing: 14/02/2013

(C.C.No.42/2013)

M.Vijayan,

S/o.Achuthan Nair,

Mukkonath House,

Cherpulassery (PO),

Palakkad – 679 503                                          -       Complainant

(By Adv.Suresh Mon)

V/s

1.The Manager,

    M/s.HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co.Ltd.

    1^st Floor, K.P.M. Arcade,

    Maharaja Towers,

    Hospital Road,

    Perinthalmanna – 679 322

(By Adv.Ullas Sudhakaran &n Saji Isaac)

2.The Manager,

   M/s.H.D.F.C. Standard Life Insurance Co.Ltd.

   Corporate Office, Trade Star,

   2^nd Floor, A Wing,

   Junction of Kondivatta, M.V.Road,

   Andheri-Kurla Road,

   Andheri East Mumbai – 400 059                     -       Opposite parties

(By Adv.Ullas Sudhakaran &n Saji Isaac)

O R D E R

By Smt.SEENA.H, PRESIDENT.

Complaint in brief:

Complainant invested an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- in a mutual fund plan of 1^st opposite party. An employee of 1^st opposite party has canvassed the complainant to join in the said plan at the complainant’s residence at Cherpulassery. Complainant joined the scheme under the impression that it was a mutual fund plan. It was  on receipt of the original policy, complainant understood that it was an insurance policy. After some months complainant approached the 1^st opposite party for cancellation of the policy as the policy was not financially viable to him. 1^st opposite party informed that he can discontinue the policy within 15 days from the receipt of the original policy. At that time complainant has not received the original policy. Opposite party sent the policy  on 16/08/12 which the complainant received on 17/08/2012. But the date mentioned therein  was 31/07/2010. On 21/08/2012 itself complainant sent the original policy alongwith a request letter for cancellation of the policy and for return of the deposited amount. 1^st opposite party sent the original policy back intimating the difficulty in processing the request as it was received after 15 days period  allowed for exercising the option to return the policy. A lawyer notice dated 13/09/2012 was caused to the opposite parties for which no reply was sent. According to complainant, the act of opposite parties amounts to clear deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Hence the complaint. Complainant prays for return of Rs.1,00,000/- with 12% interest alongwith Rs.20,000/- as compensation for mental agony.

Opposite parties filed version contending the following:

Opposite parties denied the say of the complainant that he joined the policy under the impression that it was a mutual fund plan and only on receipt of the original policy, he understood that it was an insurance policy. Policy was issued to the complainant after obtaining the proposal form which contains the terms and conditions of the policy. Moreover complainant is an educated person and hence he would not have signed the papers without knowing its contents. The original policy was delivered to the complainant on 3/8/10 itself. Again on the request of the complainant a duplicate copy was issued which was received by the complainant as admitted by him on 16/06/2011. This has admitted by the complainant in the mail sent to opposite parties on 8/7/2011.

Having  received the policy  in the year 2010 itself, complainant      failed to exercise his option to return the policy within the free look period. The policy opted by the complainant was for a term of 15 years with an annual premium of Rs.1,00,000/-. Complainant has paid only one premium. According to the terms and conditions of the  policy, if premium remains unpaid, the policy will lapse and the unutilized fund value on surrender less the surrender charge and other charges as specified in the policy will be paid. According to the policy conditions amount is payable after 3 years from the date of inception. Complainant has not made any request for surrender of the policy. Since no request for surrender was made within the free look period, complainant is entitled to the amount payable only after 3 years from the date of inception of the policy. According to the opposite parties complainant is not entitled to get back Rs.1,00,000/- along with 12% interest. The policy taken by the complainant was a HDFC Pension Supreme Policy which is a unit linked policy. During the subsistence of the policy, complainant is entitled to many benefits including death benefit. Having enjoyed the benefits of the policy and after having invested the money according to his choice, complainant cannot claim refund of the premium. Opposite parties prays for dismissal of the complaint with cost.

The evidence adduced by the parties consists of their respective chief affidavits. Ext.A1 to A5 and Ext.B1 to B2.  

Issues for consideration :

1.    Whether there is  any deficiency in service on the part of opposite  parties ?

2.    Whether the  complainant is entitled for any relief  ?

Issue No.1 &2

Complainant availed an insurance  policy of opposite party by payment of Rs.1 lakh annual premium is born out by Ext.A3 series. Ext.B2 is the proposal form signed by the complainant for availing the policy. Hence the stand of the complainant that he has joined the scheme under the impression that it is a mutual fund plan is found to be incorrect.

Now the next question is whether the complainant has applied for cancellation of the policy within the free look period. According to opposite party, the original policy was delivered to the complainant on 3/8/10 itself. Again at the request of 1^st opposite party, a duplicate copy was also issued which  the opposite party  received on 17/8/12. Though complainant contented that he received the original policy only on 17/8/12, the relevant  portion of Ext.B1, which is the photocopy of the e mail sent by the complainant to opposite parties shows that what received on 17/8/12  is the duplicate  copy and original was not received by him as he left India by that time. The relevant portion of Ext.B1 is noted below:

“The reprint  of the original document of the above plan was received by me on 16/6/2011, stating that, the original documents were dispatched on 3/8/2010. Since I had left India before that, on 01/8/2010, I had not received the original documents”.

As per Ext.B1 complainant has sent an  application to cancel the plan and  to retransfer the amount deposited on 18/6/11 itself. According to opposite parties, as per policy conditions amount payable  according to the policy conditions will be paid out after 3 years from the date of inception of the policy. But IRDA (Treatment of Discontinued linked IP) Regulation 2010 provides a maximum of Rs.5,000/- as deduction of the policy if discontinued within a period of 2 years. Accordingly Rs.5,000/- is the maximum deduction for which opposite party is entitled. Opposite party failed to refund the same when it was requested for. Hence there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party.

In view of the above discussions, we allow the complaint. Opposite parties are directed to refund an amount of Rs.95,000/- (Rupees Ninety five thousand only)   along with Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five thousand only) as compensation and Rs.1,000/-(Rupees One thousand only)  as cost of the proceedings.

Order shall be complied within one month from the date of receipt of order, failing which the complainant is entitled for 9% interest per annum for the whole amount from the date of order, till realization.           

Pronounced in the open court on this the  22^nd   day of June  2013.

                                                                      Sd/-

                                                                   Seena H

President

   Sd/-

Preetha G Nair

Member

    Sd/-

Bhanumathi.A.K

Member

APPENDIX

Exhibits marked on the side of the complainant

Ext.A1 – Postal  Envelop of 1^st opposite party sent to complainant

Ext.A2 – True copy of request letter of complainant to  opposite party dated  

             21/8/12

Ext.A3 series– Postal envelop of opposite party alongwith original policy

Ext.A4 series – True copy of lawyer notice sent by complainant’s advocate to

                       opposite party alongwith acknowledgement card.

Ext.A5 series –Undelivered lawyer notice alongwith postal acknowledgement

                       card

Exhibits marked on the side of the opposite parties

Ext.B1 –  Certified true copy of E mail sent by the complainant

Ext.B2 –Certified copy of unit linked pension proposal form.

Cost

Rs.1,000/- allowed as cost of the proceedings