BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 363 of 2019.
Date of Institution : 11.07.2019.
Date of Decision : 16.11.2023.
Balbir aged about 39 years son of Shri Ramnath son of Shri Jodha Ram, resident of village Poharkan, District Sirsa.
……Complainant.
Versus.
1. Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Ltd., 2nd Floor Ridhi Sidhi Diagnostic Centre, Dabwali Road, Sirsa.
2. HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company Ltd. First Floor, Classic Autocare Shop, Sangwan Chowk, Dabwali Road, Sirsa.
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
BEFORE: SH. PADAM SINGH THAKUR ………………PRESIDENT
MRS.SUKHDEEP KAUR………………………MEMBER.
SH. OM PARKASH TUTEJA…………………MEMBER
Present: Sh. Preet Amar, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. Mukesh Saini, Advocate for opposite party no.1.
Sh. Puneet Narang, Advocate for opposite party no.2.
ORDER
The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 ( now u/s 35 of C.P. Act, 2019) against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as Ops).
2. In brief, the case of the complainant is that in the year 2016 the father of complainant namely Shri Ramnath had purchased a vehicle Ford Endeavour bearing registration No. HR-05V-6072 through finance facility from op no.1 and the amount of loan was to be paid by father of complainant in easy monthly installments. The op no.1 in order to secure its loan and in collusion with op no.2 got insured the father of complainant under Group Insurance Scheme from op no.2. The op no.2 also issued an insurance policy namely HDFC Life Group Credit Protect Plus Insurance Plan in the name of father of complainant bearing policy No. 101N096V01 on 19.12.2016. The complainant was appointed as nominee of his father in the said policy. It is further averred that on 15.01.2018 father of complainant died due to heart attack at Civil Hospital Ellenabad. The post mortem on the body of deceased was also conducted at Civil Hospital, Sirsa. It is further averred that as per terms and conditions of the insurance policy, the complainant being the legal heir as well as nominee of the deceased has become entitled to get indemnified his claim and accordingly he approached the ops in this regard and filled necessary claim form and submitted the relevant documents to the ops for indemnification of his claim as desired by the ops who also gave every type of assurances regarding payment of claim. That after passing of sufficient time, the complainant approached the ops and requested them to indemnify his claim but the ops kept on avoiding the request of complainant on one false pretext or the other and now have refused to indemnify his claim without assigning any reasonable cause and reason. The act and conduct of the ops clearly amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on account of which complainant has suffered unnecessary harassment and mental agony. Hence, this complaint seeking direction to the ops to pay a sum of Rs.4,63,768/- i.e. sum assured amount and also to pay Rs.15,000/- as compensation for harassment and also to pay penalty and litigation expenses to the complainant.
3. On notice, op no.1 appeared and filed written statement submitting therein that father of complainant had availed loan/ finance facility amounting to Rs.3,57,500/- from op no.1 for purchasing the vehicle in question and in order to secure the amount of loan, a loan cum hypothecation cum guarantee agreement dated 23.06.2016 was executed between the parties. He also agreed to repay loan in 42 quarterly installments and to pay interest at the rate of 36% on the amount of overdue installments. It is further submitted that loanee has not paid his installments as per terms and conditions and made a gross default. The father of complainant was fully aware and having full knowledge bought insurance policy from op no.2 in which the master owner of the policy is Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company and father of complainant was member of the policy purchased by complainant’s father. The father of complainant provided his particular to op no.2. It is further submitted that op no.1 is always ready to issue NOC to the applicant after paying his outstanding amount and over dues. The complainant has never approached op no.1 and trying to avoid the payment of op no.1 which clearly shows the act and conduct of complainant. With these averments, dismissal of complaint qua op no.1 prayed for.
4. Initially none appeared on behalf of op no.2 despite service and therefore, op no.2 was proceeded against exparte. Thereafter, the exparte proceedings against op no.2 was set aside by the Hon’ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana vide order dated 29.07.2020. Op no.2 filed written version raising certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that it is admitted that op no.1 had insured the deceased Sh. Ram Nath father of complainant with op no.2 under group insurance policy scheme obtained by op no.1, as such op no.1 is the master policy holder. The death claim submitted is still under investigation and answering op has still to repudiate or allow the claim based on the investigation. It is further submitted that death claim lodged by complainant is still under investigation and answering op no.2 has nor repudiated the claim nor has allowed the claim as such the complaint being pre-mature is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone. With these averments, dismissal of complaint prayed for.
5. The complainant in evidence has tendered his affidavit Ex. CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C14.
6. On the other hand, op no.1 has tendered documents Ex.R1 to Ex.R4. No other evidence was produced by op no.1 despite availing several opportunities. Op no.2 also did not lead any evidence despite availing several opportunities and as such remaining evidence of op no.1 and evidence of op no.2 was closed by order.
7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file carefully.
8. Admittedly in the year 2016 the father of complainant namely Ram Nath had purchased a vehicle bearing registration No. HR-05V-6072 after availing finance facility of the amount of Rs.3,57,500/- from op no.1. The op no.1 also got insured the father of complainant under Group Insurance Scheme through op no.2 in order to secure the loan amount. The father of complainant expired on 15.01.2018 as is evident from his death certificate Ex.C5. According to the complainant, he was made nominee of his father in the above said insurance policy and after his death, he is entitled to the claim under the policy in question from op no.2. However, the op no.1 bank has taken a specific stand that loanee has not paid installments as per the terms and conditions and the master owner of the policy is Cholamandlam Investment and Finance Company and father of complainant was member of the policy. Admittedly the claim was lodged by the complainant with op no.2 vide claim form Ex.C1 by which the complainant undertook that he has to pay the outstanding amount to the Master Policy Holder and the balance amount be paid to him. The sum insured of the policy was Rs.4,63768/- and as the father of complainant did not pay the installment of the loan amount, so the claim amount of Rs.4,63,768/- i.e. sum insured amount has already been paid to the op no.1 by op no.2 on 27.09.2021 against the outstanding loan amount as is evident from the copy of statement of account placed on file by op no.1 as Ex.R1. So, the complainant is not entitled to the sum insured amount because the sum insured amount has already been paid to the op no.1 i.e. Master of the policy against outstanding loan amount of the father of complainant.
9. However, keeping in view the fact that death of the father of complainant took place on 15.01.2018 whereas op no.2 paid the sum insured to the op no.1 towards the outstanding loan amount on 27.09.2021 i.e. after long delay of three years and eight months and op no.1 added interest amount in the loan account, therefore, op no.2 insurance company is liable to pay the interest @19% per annum as charged by op no.1 as per loan agreement on the amount of Rs.4,63,768/- for the above said period of three years and eight months. The op no.2 insurance company will pay the said interest amount in the loan account of father of complainant and op no.1 will adjust the same towards loan amount as still loan amount of said Ram Nath deceased is outstanding against complainant’s family. The op no.2 will pay the said interest amount to op no.1 within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. It is also further made clear that after adjustment of the said interest amount of three years and eight months in the loan amount, if any amount becomes extra after clearance of the loan amount, same shall be paid to the complainant. The present complaint stands disposed of accordingly. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced: Member Member President,
Dated: 16.11.2023. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Sirsa.
