Dated:04.03.2023

O R D E R

BY HON’BLE Mr. JUSTICE HULUVADI G RAMESH : PRESIDENT

1. This Appeal filed by complainant under Section 41 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019, aggrieved by an order dated 30.01.2023, passed in CC/220/2022 by II Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bengaluru (herein after referred as District Commission and the parties arrayed as in the consumer complaint)

2. Commission examined grounds of appeal, impugned order and heard appellant.  Accordingly, found satisfied to dispense with issuance of notice of this Appeal to the respondent to avoid further delay.

3. Appellant/Complainant being a senior citizen of age 72 years had filed Consumer Complaint before District Commission on 30.01.2023 alleging that OP had misguided to opt for a policy Life Annuity with return of purchase price on death and sought for refund of the premium paid towards the said policy. Upon service of notice, OP appeared before the Commission below and contested the matter stating that the complainant/appellant herein had read the terms and conditions and opted for the said policy and furthermore he did not opt for cancellation of the said policy within lock-in period i.e., 15 days from the date of receipt of the said policy bond.  The Commission below after holding enquiry recorded reasons in favour of OPs and dismissed the complaint without cost.  Aggrieved by the said order complainant preferred this appeal.  It is to be noted herein that the said policy was w.e.f. 16.11.2021 and the date of maturity being 15.11.2060 and a sum of Rs.50,000/- is payable for which complainant/appellant will get benefit term of 39 years. No doubt the complainant/appellant had signed the policy and no doubt the complainant/appellant had not cancelled the said policy within lock-in period.  But facts remained that complainant/appellant is a senior citizen of age 72 years and the maturity of the said policy is on 15.11.2060 by which the appellant/complainant would be approximately 120 years old and visibly it is impossible for any person to enjoy the benefits of the policy at the age of 120 years. Thus such fact cannot be nipped by making use of the 15 days lock-in period for cancellation of the said policy and this fact is overlooked by the Commission below.  Thus in such circumstances, in our view, impugned order requires interference of this Commission.  Accordingly, Commission proceed to allow the appeal by setting aside the impugned order passed by II Additional District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bengaluru and directed OP to refund the premium of Rs.50,000/- paid by the complainant within 60 days from the date of receipt of this order. Thus Appeal stands disposed off.

4. .      Send a copy of this Order to the District Commission and parties to the appeal.

Lady MemberJudicial MemberPresident

*GGH*