DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

WEST TRIPURA :  AGARTALA

 

CASE   NO:  CC- 357/2022

 

Abdul Rasid,

S/O- Lt. Abdul Aziz, 

Raj Nagar, Near Raj Nagar School,

Near Battala, Agartala, 

West Tripura. ….......Complainant.

 

-VERSUS-

 

1.  Branch Manager,

Tata AIA Life Insurance Company Ltd., Mantribari Road, Near Industrial Bank,

Agartala, Tripura West,

 

2. Tata AIA Life Insurance Company Ltd.

14th Floor, Tower A, Peninsula Business Park, 

Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, 

Mumbai- 400013.….....Opposite Parties.

 

    _______PRESENT________

 

 SRI GOURAM DEBNATH

PRESIDENT,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

 

DR (SMT) BINDU PAL

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER 

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, 

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

SRI SAMIR  GUPTA

MEMBER,

  DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES  

REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

F I N A L    O R D E R:-

 

30.01.2023- None is present for the complainant. The case is being dragged since 25.07.2022. Today  is fixed for maintainability of the case. The brief fact is that the complainant insurer purchased as policy of Insurance from Sri Sudip Majumder, Agent of Tata AIA Life Insurance Co. Ltd. on the understanding that he is to pay Rs.2,00,000/- as one time premium and on maturity he will be refunded Rs.5 lacs. However, after receiving the policy of insurance it is transpired that annual premium of Rs.99,000/- as 1st year premium was paid. And the rest amount is the advance premium for next year. This fact was not divulged to the complainant insurer. Thereafter, the complainant insurer requested the present O.P. insurance Co. for getting back paid amount. Therefore, even if the agent of the Insurance company practiced any fraud upon the complainant insurer, in absence of other facts the insurance company can not be held responsible on the ground of deficiency of service. On the top of it the agent of the  Insurance company Mr. Sudip Manjumder allegedly representing the insurance company has not been made a party. Therefore, the complainant insured has no cause of action against the O.P. insurance company. Therefore, can not maintain any lis. 

Hence, the case stands disposed off as not maintainable.