Delhi

New Delhi

CC/567/2015

Umesh Chandra Tiwari - Complainant(s)

Versus

AEGON Religare Life Insurance & Ors - Opp.Party(s)

26 Nov 2019

ORDER

 

 

                       CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

                  (DISTT. NEW DELHI),

                      ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR, VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

                                                        NEW DELHI-110001

    Case No.C.C.567/2015                              Dated:

                In the matter of:

Sh. Umesh Chandra Tiwari,

S/o Sh. Madan Mohan Tiwari,

R/o RZG-832, Gali No.17, Rajnagar Part-II,

Palam Colony, New Delhi-77.

                            ……..COMPLAINANT

VERSUS

1.   AEGON-Religare Life  Insurance,

           Through its Managing Director/CEO &

             Building No.3, 3^rd Floor,

             Unit No.1. Nesco IT Park,

           Western Express Highway,

             Goregaon, (East)  Mumbai-400063.

 

2.        Mr. Rahul Malhotra,

C/o AEGON- Religare Life Insurance

 

           Both R/o : 306-310, Mechantile House,

K.G.Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001.

…..OPPOSITE PARTIES

NIPUR CHANDNA, MEMBER

ORDER

      

The complainant has filed the present complaint against the OPs under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  The gist of the complaint is that the complainant had taken policy/ULIP Plan of Kotak Mahindra in the year 2003.  As the complainant was member of Indian Army and transferred to border areas, hence he could not continue paying premium for the above policy, subsequently, the policy got lapsed.

2.     On the  second week of June, 2012, complainant received a call from Sh. Rahul Malhotra, employee of OP-2 informing him that he had taken a policy worth Rs.1,25,000/- the same has been discontinued and lapsed.  Mr. Rahal also informed that the lapsed policy could either be revived or the entire premium already deposited with Kotak Mahindra would be refunded along with bonus etc. however, he is required to make a onetime payment of Rs.30,000/-.  On assurance of Mr. Rahul, the complainant sent a cheque dt. 11.6.2012 for a sum of Rs.30,000/- through courier.

3.     After two weeks, complainant telephonically inquired about the policy then he was informed that he is required to send an additional amount of Rs.25,000/- alongwith some  ID proofs, and the complainant against sent Rs.25,000/- alongwith ID proofs to the OP. The complainant awaited for further information/calls from Mr. Rahul but he neither receive any refund and  nor any call from Mr. Rahul.  Thereafter, the complainant made lodged the complaint  with OP, in pursuant to his complaint, the OP informed him that policy No.120613544195 and 120713656168 has been issued in the name of complainant, when complainant protested that he never sought new polices  and he did not receive the above said two policies and asked the OP to cancel the same but the OP flatly refused to do so.  The complainant again made many requests to the OP for cancellation of policies but all in vain.  On 24.7.2014, complainant made complaint to the IRDA for refund of the claim amount, which is pending disposal.  The complainant also sent a legal notice dt. 22.12.2014 but no reply was received from the OP.  Complainant, therefore approached this Forum for redressal of his grievance.

 

 

4.     Complaint has been contested by the OPs.  In its written statement OPs have stated that the complainant has suppressed the material facts from the Hon’ble Forum and as such the complaint is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone.  It is stated that the complainant has submitted application for insurance  bearing No.A0762058 dt. 16.6.12 proposing for Flexi Money Back Plan for a premium of Rs.30,000/-.  It is stated that OP also made a call to the complainant to confirm the policy terms and conditions and after confirmation received from the complainant, the policy was issued to him. It is stated that the policy terms and conditions specifically provides for a Free Look Period of 15 days, during this period the policy owner is entitled to review the policy terms and conditions and request for a cancellation,  if dissatisfied with the terms and conditions of the policy.  The policy documents were delivered to the complainant on 20.07.2012 and the same was duly received by him.  The complainant failed to approach OP for conversion/cancellation or refund of the policy during free-looking period, it was presumed that the contract was legally concluded between the parties.  The OP had acted with utmost care and diligence and as such the complainant is not entitled for any relief prayed.

5.     Both the parties have filed their  evidences by way of affidavit.

6.     We have heard argument advance at the Bar and have perused the record.

7.     Perusal of the file shows that as per the certificate issued by Blue Dart Courier, the policy was delivered to the complainant on 20.7.2012 vide Airway bill No.40381480532, the first request for cancellation of the policy  was made by the complainant on 17.9.2012.  It is argued on behalf of OP that since the policy was delivered to the complainant on 20.7,.2012 and  request for cancellation of the policy  was made by the complainant on 17.9.2012 i.e. beyond the Free Look in Period, hence, OP is not liable for any relief claimed.

8.     On the contrary, the complainant has placed on record the serving certificate dt. 18.9.2012  issued by his office which clarified that he was posted as Havildar and was serving with Military College of EME, Secunderabad since 10.2.2010. This shows that the policy documents was not received by the complainant on 20.7.2012, hence, the question of cancellation of policy in Free Look in Period does not arises.   Further, as soon as, he become aware of the policy in question he wrote letter dt. 17.9.2012 to the OP Co. for discontinuation of the policy in question.   Thereafter, he further wrote letter dt. 25.10.2012, 7.11.2012, 31.1.2013, 25.3.2013 to the OP Co. for discontinuation of the policy and refund of the money.  The OP Insurance Co. under the pretext of Free Look in Period arbitrary turned down the cancellation request of the complainant which is unjustified and amounts to deficiency in services on behalf of OP.

9.     In view of the above discussion, we are of the considered view that non-refund of the premium by the OP amounts to deficiency in services on the part of OPs.  We therefore hold OPs guilty of deficiency in services and direct them as under:

1. Refund to the complainant a sum of Rs.55,000/-  along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of complaint i.e. 26.8.2015 till its realization,
2. Pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards compensation on account of pain and mental agony suffered by him this will include the cost of litigation.

The above said amount shall be paid within 30 days from today failing which 9% interest per annum shall be payable from the date of order till the date of payment.  Copy of this order be sent to the parties as statutorily required. This final order be sent to server (www.confonet.nic.in ).File be consigned to record room.

Announced in open Forum on 26/11/2019.

 

(ARUN KUMAR ARYA)

                                                      PRESIDENT

                           (NIPUR CHANDNA)                                            (H M VYAS)

                                              MEMBER                                                   MEMBER