DATE OF FILING                    :     11.12.2014.

DATE OF S/R                            :      23.02.2014.

DATE OF FINAL ORDER      :     24.11.2015.

Sri Sushil Kr. Mitra,

son of  late Binod Behari Mitra

of 2, Botanical Garden Lane, Block no. D/7, IHE,

P.S. A.J.C. Bose B. Garden,

District Howrah..………………………………………………………  COMPLAINANT.

• Versus   -

The Manager,

HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company Limited,

3, Red Cross Place, 1^st Floor, Menaka Estate,

Kolkata 700001, &

its registered office at Lodha Excelus, 13^th floor,

Apollo Mills Compound N.M. Joshi Marg,

Mahalaxmi,

Mumbai 400011. …………………….…………………………….…OPPOSITE PARTY.

 P    R    E     S    E    N     T

 Hon’ble President  :   Shri  B. D.  Nanda,  M.A. ( double ), L.L.M., WBHJS.

Hon’ble Member      :      Smt. Jhumki Saha.

 Hon’ble Member : Shri A.K. Pathak.

 F  I   N   A    L       O    R   D    E     R

1. The complainant namely, Sushil Kr. Mitra,  by filing a petition U/S 12 of the C. P. Act, 1986 ( as amended upto date ) has prayed for a direction to be given upon the O.P. to refund of  Rs. 52,225/- being the 1^st premium amount   of the insurance policy in question  along with interest @ 40% p.a., to pay compensation of Rs. 50,000/- for harassment, physical injury, mental agony and litigation  costs along with other relief or reliefs as the Forum may deem fit and proper.  

2. The brief facts of the case is that the complainant purchased a life insurance policy on payment of   Rs. 52,225/- through cheque  dated 29.8.2014 from his Saving Bank  A/c. no. 418510110000025  of Bank of India, B.E. College Branch, Howrah 3.But no certificate was issued in favour of the complainant. Further complainant informed o.p. about the fact through registered post with A/D on 18.11.2014 but no reply was sent by the o.p. After that  O.p. deliberately  issued one policy in favour of one Saikat Mitra instead of  complainant. For that reason complainant suffered mental harassment and anxiety due to negligence of the o.p.    Finding no other alternative complainant filed this complaint with the aforesaid prayers.  Hence the case.    

3. Notice was served. The o.p.  appeared and filed written version.  So the case was heard on contest against o.p.

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?

2. Whether the complainant is entitled to get any relief and compensation as prayed for? 

DECISION  WITH   REASONS      :

5. Both the points are taken up together for consideration. We have carefully gone through the written version of o.p. and documents filed by both the parties and noted their contents.   The case of the o.p. is that in every  submitted documents like proposal form and others, everywhere Saikat Mitra signed as “life to be assured” and in the column ‘nominee’, the name of  Sushil Kumar Mitra, is appearing who is the present complainant. On scrutiny of the proposal form, we also find that under the column ‘personal details of life to be assured’,the name of Saikat Mitra is appearing with his personal details and photograph. Nowhere in the proposal form, the signature of Sushil Kumar Mitra is appearing. Moreover in the FIRST PREMIUM RECEIPT, provided by o.p on 28.10.2014, the amount is appearing as Rs. 52000 and not Rs. 52,225 alongwith the name of policy holder as Saikat Mitra. Accordingly, o.p issued policy document in favour of Saikat Mitra. So,we find no deficiency on the part of o.p. Accordingly, the complaint fails.  Both the points are accordingly disposed of.

      Hence,

                                    O     R     D      E      R      E        D

           That the C. C. Case No. 633  of 2014 ( HDF 633 of 2014 )  be  dismissed on contest against o.p without costs.   

            Supply the copies of the order to the parties, as per rule.

     DICTATED  &    CORRECTED

BY   ME.  

  (   A.K. Pathak  )                                              

  Member, C.D.R.F., Howrah.