BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.
Complaint No.256 of 2015
Date of Instt. 11.06.2015
Date of Decision :17.06.2016
Nandni Narang D/o Gobind Rai R/o H.No.B-38/4, Dr.Sadiq Ali, near Shiv Colony, Kapurthala at present resident at H.No.228-B, New Hardev Nagar, Jalandhar.
..........Complainant
Versus
1.The Reliance Life Insurance Co.Ltd., Regd.Office:-H Block, 1st Floor, Dhirubhai Ambani Knowledge City, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra through its Director.
2.The Reliance Life Insurance Co.Ltd., State Head Office, SCO-21-22, 1st Floor, Midland Financial Centre, Opp.Hotel Kings, Near ICICI Bank, GT Road, Jalandhar through its Regional Manager.
3.The Reliance Life Insurance Co.Ltd, SCO-21-22, 1st Floor, Midland Financial Centre, Opp.Hotel Kings, Near ICICI Bank, GT Road, Jalandhar through its Branch Manager.
4.Sahib Ranbir Singh, Sales Manager, The Reliance Life Insurance Co.Ltd., SCO-21-22, 1st Floor, Midland Financial Centre, Opp.Hotel Kings, Near ICICI Bank, GT Road, Jalandhar.
.........Opposite parties
Complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.
Before: S. Bhupinder Singh (President)
Mrs. Jyotsna Thatai (Member)
Sh.Parminder Sharma (Member)
Present: Sh.AS Thind Adv., counsel for the complainant.
Sh.BB Sekhri Adv., counsel for OPs No.1 to 3.
Opposite party No.4 exparte.
Order
Bhupinder Singh (President)
1. The complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act against the opposite parties (hereinafter called as OPs) on the averments that complainant got life insurance policy bearing No.12822137 from OP No.3 with a sum insured of Rs.1,40,000/- on payment of premium Rs.14,000/- annually started in the year 2009 and the complainant paid premium for three years to OP No.3 and the last installment of premium was paid on 20.10.2011. Thereafter, complainant was unable to pay the premium and the policy of the complainant was foreclosed by the OP on 20.10.2013 and the amount payable to the complainant after foreclosure of the policy came out to be Rs.49,991/-. Complainant further submitted that complainant was married on 12.10.2013 to Mr.Sagun Chawla R/o Jalandhar. Thereafter, complainant started staying at her matrimonial home. Complainant approached OP No.3 in January 2015 for release of the amount of the aforesaid policy as she was in need of money. Resultantly, OP got signatures of the complainant on some papers. Complainant also submitted ID proof, bank passbook, etc. to the OPs. In February 2015, when the complainant visited her parental house, her mother gave envelope of policy to the complainant and the complainant astonished to know that new policy bearing No.52020104 has been issued in her name by the OP on 21.1.2015. The amount of previous policy of complainant has been transferred in the new policy as installment premium and the total sum assured was Rs.5,45,000/-. Complainant further submitted that complainant has never requested to the OPs No.3 and 4 to issue the fresh policy and to transfer her refunds of the previous policy to new policy. In-fact, the complainant has requested the OPs No.3 & 4 to release the amount of previous policy as she was in need of money. Complainant was also shocked to find that application form for the new policy does not bear her signatures, in-fact her signatures have been forged by OPs No.3 & 4 at various places on the application form as well as other documents such as new application for transfer of amount of previous policy to new policy, on foreclosure payout form, declaration, etc. in order to issue new policy in the name of complainant. Complainant then approached OP for cancellation of the new policy vide letter dated 17.4.2015 and requested for the refund of the amount but the OP did not pay any heed to the request of the complainant. On such averments, the complainant has prayed for directing the OPs to refund the amount of Rs.49,991/- alongwith interest. She has also claimed compensation and litigation expenses.
2. Upon notice, OPs No.1 to 3 appeared through counsel and filed written reply pleading that complainant himself has pleaded forgery, cheating and fraud committed by the OPs with the complainant. So, she should approach Civil Court because where there are allegations of forgery, fraud, misappropriation, etc. The dispute is not a consumer dispute rather it is criminal offence, as such, Consumer Fora has no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the said dispute. Complainant got life insurance policy bearing No.12822137 by making payment of premium of Rs.42,000/-. The policy term was 20 years and premium term was also 20 years. The policy was issued on 21.10.2008. Complainant paid first three premiums yearly. Thereafter, complainant did not make the payment of any further premium. As such, the policy lapsed due to non payment of further premium. Complainant being a graduate person requested for getting another policy and requested that the premium of previous policy should be transferred to new policy and in this regard she filled in the proposal form No.L0524285 against which the OP issued policy bearing No.52020104. The term of this policy was 14 years and the premium payment term was seven years. The policy was issued on 21.1.2015 and the same was sent to the given address of the complainant and the same was received on 31.1.2015 by the complainant. Thereafter, complainant wrote a letter dated 17.4.2015 to the OPs stating that she is unable to continue her policy bearing No.52020104 due to financial crisis and requested to close the policy and refund her amount. In this application also, the complainant never raised any objection that the signatures of the complainant were forged by the OPs on the application form at various places. So, allegations of the complainant that the OP has forged her signatures at various places in the application as well as foreclosure form dated 13.1.2015. Complainant herself has admitted that the policy was delivered to her parental house in January 2015 and she herself received the policy in February 2015 from her parents. If the complainant was not satisfied with the terms and conditions of the policy, she could have returned the policy and request for cancellation of the same and the refund of the amount within free look period of 15 days from the date of receipt of policy documents but she applied for cancellation of the policy and refund of the amount vide application dated 17.4.2015 i.e. after a lapse free look period of 15 days from the date of receipt of policy documents. OPs was justified in not closing the policy and refund of the premium to the complainant.
3. Notice of this complaint was given to the OP No.4 but nobody has turned-up despite service and as such it was proceeded against exparte.
4. In support of her complaint, learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.CA alongwith copies of documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C9 and closed her evidence.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for opposite parties No.1 to 3 has tendered affidavit Ex.OPA alongwith copies of documents Ex.OP1 to Ex.OP6 and closed evidence.
6. We have heard the Ld. counsel for the parties, minutely gone through the record and have appreciated the evidence produced on record by both the parties with the valuable assistance of Ld. counsels for the parties.
7. From the record i.e. pleadings of the parties and the evidence produced on record by both the parties, it is clear that complainant got life insurance policy bearing No.12822137 from OP No.3 with sum insured of Rs.1,40,000/- on payment of premium Rs.14,000/- annually starting in the year 2009 and the complainant paid premium for three years to OP No.3 and the last installment of premium was paid on 20.10.2011. Thereafter, complainant was unable to pay the premium and the policy of the complainant was foreclosed by the OP on 20.10.2013 and the amount payable to the complainant after foreclosure of the policy came out to Rs.49,991/-. Complainant further submitted that complainant was married on 12.10.2013 to Mr.Sagun Chawla R/o Jalandhar. Thereafter, complainant started staying at her matrimonial home. Complainant approached OP No.3 in January 2015 for release of the amount of the aforesaid policy as she was in need of money. Resultantly, OP got signature of the complainant on some papers. Complainant also submitted ID proof, bank passbook, etc. to the OPs. In February 2015, when the complainant visited her parental house then her mother gave envelope of policy to the complainant and the complainant astonished to know that new policy bearing No.52020104 has been issued in her name by the OP on 21.1.2015. The amount of previous policy of complainant has been transferred in the new policy as installment premium and the total sum assured was Rs.5,45,000/-. Complainant further submitted that complainant has never requested to the OPs No.3 and 4 to issue fresh policy and to transfer her refunds of previous policy to new policy. In-fact, the complainant has requested the OPs No.3 & 4 to release the amount of previous policy as she was in need of money. Complainant was also shocked to find that application form for the new policy does not bear her signatures in-fact her signatures have been forged by OPs No.3 & 4 at various places on the application form as well as other documents such as new application for transfer of amount of previous policy to new policy, on foreclosure payout form, declaration, etc. in order to issue new policy Ex.OP4 in the name of complainant. Complainant then approached OP for cancellation of the new policy vide letter dated 17.4.2015 Ex.OP3 and requested for the refund of the amount but the OP did not pay any heed to the request of the complainant. The learned counsel for the complainant submitted that all this amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the OPs qua the complainant.
8. Whereas the case of the OPs No.1 to 3 is that complainant himself has pleaded forgery, cheating and fraud committed by the OP with the complainant. So, she should approach Civil Court because where there are allegations of forgery, fraud, misappropriation, etc. The dispute is not a consumer dispute rather it is criminal offence, as such, Consumer Fora has no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the said dispute. Complainant got life insurance policy bearing No.12822137 Ex.OP5 by making payment of premium of Rs.42,000/-. The policy term was 20 years and premium term was also 20 years. The policy was issued on 21.10.2008. Complainant paid first three premiums yearly. Thereafter, complainant did not make the payment of any further premium. As such, the policy lapsed due to non payment of further premium. Complainant being graduate person requested for getting another policy and requested that the premium of previous policy may be transferred to new policy and in this regard she filled in the proposal form No.L0524285 against which the OP issued policy bearing No.52020104 Ex.OP4. The term of this policy was 14 years and the premium payment term was seven years. The policy was issued on 21.1.2015 and the same was sent to the given address of the complainant and the same was received on 31.1.2015 by the complainant. Thereafter, complainant wrote letter Ex.OP3 dated 17.4.2015 to the OPs stating that she is unable to continue her policy bearing No.52020104 due to financial crisis and requested to close the policy and refund her amount. In this application also, the complainant never raised any objection that the signatures of the complainant were forged by the OPs on the application form at various places i.e. on the foreclosure document, transfer voucher as well as on application. So, allegations of the complainant that the OP has forged her signatures at various places in the application i.e. at seven places as well as foreclosure form dated 13.1.2015 and cancel voucher/forum, at least at 9/10 places. Complainant herself has admitted that the policy was delivered to her parents in January 2015 and she herself received the policy in February 2015 from her parents. If the complainant was not satisfied with the terms and conditions of the policy, she could return the policy and request for cancellation of the same and refund of the amount within free look period of 15 days from the date of receipt of policy documents but she applied for cancellation of the policy and refund of the amount only vide application Ex.OP3 dated 17.4.2015 i.e. after a lapse free look period of 15 days from the date of receipt of policy documents. OPs was justified in not closing the policy and refund of the premium to the complainant. Learned counsel for the OPs No.1 to 3 submitted that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the OPs No.1 to 3 qua the complainant.
9. From the entire above discussion, we have come to the conclusion that complainant obtained life insurance policy bearing No.12822137 Ex.OP5 from OPs on payment of premium of Rs.14,000/-. The policy term was 20 years and premium paying term was also 20 years and date of commencement of policy is 20.10.2008. Complainant paid premium for three years only. Thereafter, complainant did not pay any premium. As such, policy lapsed due to non payment of premium. Thereafter, complainant requested for foreclosure of the earlier policy by submitting application on the prescribed performa dated 13.1.2015 and surrender value of the policy was calculated to Rs.49,991/-. Complainant submitted another application for obtaining new insurance policy “Super Endowment Plan”. In this regard, she filed in application/proposal form and also submitted her ID proofs which are duly attached with the policy Ex.OP4 and she also requested that foreclosed amount of earlier policy bearing No.12822137 be transferred to the new application No.L0524285 for the issuance of new policy. Resultantly, OP issued new policy i.e. Super Endowment Plan (Rev), the policy bearing No.52020104 Ex.OP4. The said policy Ex.OP4 was issued on 21.1.2015 which was duly received at the address of the complainant/ insured on 31.1.2015 via Speed Post POD No.EP800594337IN. The complainant was married at Jalandhar. In February 2015, when she visited her parental house, she received the policy documents from her mother in February 2015. All this shows that complainant received the policy documents of the new policy Ex.OP4 in February 2015. Complainant submitted that when she saw the policy, she was surprised that new policy has been issued by the OP to the complainant on 21.1.2015 and the amount of previous policy has been transferred in the new policy. The complainant has stated that she never requested the OPs No.3 & 4 to transfer her funds of previous policy to issue her fresh policy. She also came to know that her signatures on the application form at various places are forged ones and OPs No.3 & 4 have forged and fabricated her signatures on application at 7 places. She also submitted that she never signed foreclosure form. Her signatures on the foreclosure form are also forged one. She also submitted that she never requested for transfer of the amount of previous policy to the new one. Her signatures on the transfer voucher are also forged one. In this way complainant has stated that the OPs have forged her signatures at various places i.e. at 9/10 places i.e. on the application form, on the declaration, on the transfer voucher, on the foreclosure form, etc. She also denied that she ever applied for new policy. She also submitted that she received the policy herself from her mother in February 2015 when she visited her parental house. Complainant came to now all these facts that her signatures have been forged by the OPs at various places i.e. at 9/10 places on various documents, then why she did not apply for cancellation of the policy and refund of the premium amount immediately in February 2015 but she for the first time wrote application to the OP to close the new policy and refund the amount of this policy Ex.OP3. Even in this application Ex.OP3, the complainant did not raise any voice that she never applied for this new policy Ex.OP4. Her signatures have been forged by the OPs. She also did not raise any objection that the OP has created all these documents with malafide intention. She simply requested vide this application Ex.OP3 dated 17.4.2015 to the OP to close her policy as she is unable to continue the same due to financial crisis. Complainant had received the policy documents in February 2015 as she herself admitted in para No.5 of the complaint that she received the policy documents in February 2015 when she visited her parental house and her mother gave the policy documents to the complainant. If the complainant was not satisfied with the terms and conditions of the policy or that her signatures were forged on various documents and that she never applied for the said policy then why she did not apply for cancellation of the policy and refund of the premium amount within free look period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the policy i.e. in February 2015 and why she waited for two months and she for the first time applied for closure of the policy and return of the premium amount only on the ground that she is unable to continue the policy due to financial crisis vide application dated 17.4.2015 i.e. after lapse a period of about two months from the date of receipt of the policy documents. As such, OP was justified in not admitting the request of the complainant for closure of the policy and refund of the amount. As such, we do not find any deficiency in service on the part of the OP qua the complainant. However, complainant has submitted that she never applied for this new policy Ex.OP4. She never signed the application form/proposal form. Her signatures on the application form at various places i.e. 9 to 10 places have been forged by the OPs. Not only this, she also submitted that her signatures on the foreclosure form are also forged one and forged by the OPs. She also stated that her signatures on transfer voucher requesting the OP to transfer the amount of her previous policy Ex.OP5 for the issuance of new policy Ex.OP4, are also forged ones and have been forged by the OPs. This Forum is not competent to decide the forgery of the signatures of the complainant on various documents at various places. Complainant has herself submitted that the OPs have cheated and played fraud with the complainant and they have forged various documents by forging her signatures at various places. It has been held by Hon'ble National Commission in case Vimal Raosaheb Chougule & Ors Vs. Stock Holding Corporation of India and Ors 2013(4) CPJ (NC) 34 that “where there are allegations of forgery, fraudulent transfer of share as well as misappropriation made against respondent No.1 as well as against respondents No.2 & 3 by petitioners, complaint under Consumer Protection Act is not maintainable and it was held that alleged dispute is not a consumer dispute rather it is criminal offence and the Consumer Fora has no jurisdiction to entertain and decide such dispute”. So, consequently, we hold that this complaint is not maintainable here and the complainant at liberty to take the matter in dispute to the Civil Court to decide forgery of her signatures at various places on various documents.
10. Consequently, it is ordered that as the complaint is not maintainable, the same may be returned to the complainant with liberty to approach appropriate court/authority for redressal of her grievance. Keeping in view the peculiar circumstances of the case, parties are left to bear their own cost. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs under rules. File be consigned to the record room.
Dated Parminder Sharma Jyotsna Thatai Bhupinder Singh
17.06.2016 Member Member President
