ORDER EXH-1

Date 16/11/2021

Perused the complaint and written version filed by Opposite Party. On the day of Final Hearing the Complainant filed pursis that there complaint, evidence is deemed as their written and oral Arguments.

The Opposite Party absent and not argued the matter.

It is observed that there must be framed preliminary issue regarding the maintainability of the complaint. So issue is framed that

Issue  Whether this Commission has jurisdiction to try the

             Complaint?   “No”

The Complainant averts in his complaint that he has taken “Life Long Unit Linked Policy” from the Opposite Party and the Opposite Party assured the Unit Linked Benefits to the Complainant. But thereafter, the Complainant is not satisfied with the benefits getting to him through this said policy. So he has made complaints to the Opposite Party. The Opposite Party replied that, the they are not responsible for any expected gains to the Complainant and also they have submitted that this Hon’ble Commission has no jurisdiction to entertain the such complaint as the said Policy and investment made under Unit Linked Policy is a speculative game and speculative matter does not comes Consumer Protection Act.

After going through entire fact and circumstance this Commission is of the opinion in this matter examination chief and cross examination of the parties is necessary for the proper adjudication of the matter and also detailed evidence is necessary for the same. This is not possible in the procedure of the Consumer Protection Act at trial. Therefore, this Commission has no jurisdiction to try this complaint.       

Hence Complaint stands dismissed.