Haryana

Ambala

CC/150/2020

Sanjeev Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

ICICI Prudential Life Inss Co ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Pawan Kumar Goel

12 Jun 2023

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, AMBALA.

Complaint case no.	:	150 of 2020
Date of Institution	:	14.08.2020
Date of decision	:	12.06.2023

 

Sanjeev Kumar son of Late Sh. Shiv Lal, age 48 years, resident of House no.68, Hari Nagar, behind B.D.Flour Mill, Ambala Cantt.

          ……. Complainant

                                                Versus

1. ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Co. Ltd. having its Branch Office at Sudershan Tower, opp. Dr. Major S.K.Garg Hospital, Nicholson Road, Ambala Cantt. through its Branch Manager.
2. ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Co. Ltd. having its Regd. Office 1089, Appasaheb Marathe Marg, Prabhadevi, Mumbai-400025

                                                                                                    ….…. Opposite Parties.

Before:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

                             Smt. Ruby Sharma, Member,

          Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Member.           

 

Present:       Shri Pawan Kumar Goel, Advocate for the complainant.

                     Shri Sunil Jain, Advocate, counsel for the OPs.

Order:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

1.                 Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the Opposite Parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) praying for issuance of following directions to them:-

1. To revive the original Policy no.17574160 or in the alternative to return amount of Rs.1,06,436/- alongwith interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of deposit.
2. To pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation/damages on account of physical and mental harassment besides causing financial losses as well as for rendering deficiency in service and
3. To pay Rs.20,000/- on account of litigation expenses.
4. Grant any other relief which this Hon’ble Commission may deems fit.

 

2.             Brief facts of the case are that  the complainant  had obtained a life insurance policy-[Guaranteed Saving Insurance Plan] no. 17574160 from the OPs for an amount of Rs.2,10,000/- and initial amount of premium was fixed as Rs.30,000/- (Yearly). The said Policy was got done for 15 years commencing from 15.03.2013 to 15.03.2028. An amount of Rs.30,000/- with Service Tax & Education Tax of Rs.9271/- thereby total amount of Rs.31,000/- was deposited by the complainant with OP No.1 and a receipt no.C8152830 dated 12.03.2013 was issued in this regard.  The complainant did not receive any message from OPs due to which he could not deposit the second premium. The reason for not receiving of any SMS from OPs was told on enquiry, to the complainant that the company had recorded his wrong mobile no. In the year, 2016, the complainant contacted OP No.1, who assured the complainant that his policy will be revived and he will have to deposit Rs.1,06,348.17/- Accordingly, the complainant vide cheque no.787972 dated 14.09.2016 deposited Rs.106347/- and as such, letter dated 19.09.2016 had been issued by the OPs to the complainant whereby they admitted to have received Rs.106348.17 and also directed the complainant to further deposit Rs.87.83/- which the complainant again deposited vide cheque no.787974 dated 04.10.2016. The complainant after deposit of the above amount gave a copy of deposit made by him to OP and then he was assured that his policy will be revived and there is no need to worry. The complainant went to the OPs in the month of June, 2017 to deposit the instalment but he was told that there is some confusion regarding his policy. Thereafter, the complainant made several rounds since July, 2017 but he was not informed of status of his policy. The amount of complainant is still with the OPs which has neither been returned back nor any information about insurance policy is given. Rather, in the year July, 2019 the complainant was told that his policy could not be revived and that his amount has been sent through cheque but the complainant never received any amount. Hence, the present complaint.
3.           Upon notice, the OPs appeared and filed written version raising preliminary objections to the effect that the complainant has approached this Commission with unclean hands; this complaint is barred by limitation; the parties are governed by terms and conditions of the policy as such the complainant cannot escape from it; as per terms and conditions of the policy, the OPs were not under any obligation to notify the policy holder of the premium due dates; the complainant failed to approach the OPs within freelook period of the policy in question etc. On merits, it has been stated that due to non-payment of renewal premiums since 15.03.2014, the subject policy lapsed and ultimately foreclosed i.e. terminated on 15.03.2016 as per the policy terms and conditions. The said fact was duly informed to the complainant vide letter dated 16.03.2016. As per Clause 2 under the General Conditions, the complainant had an option of reviving the subject policy within 2 years from the due date of the first unpaid premium. On 14.09.2016, the OPs were in receipt of a request for reinstatement of the policy, alongwith a Personal Health Declaration Form and an SBI cheque dated 14.09.2016 for Rs.1,06.347/-. Due to system error on 19.09.2016, a letter was sent to the complainant to send the short premium, which had been received by the OPs. Furthermore, the premium already paid by the complainant is not liable to be refunded because the OPs have covered the life of the proposer from 15.03.2013 until 15.03.2014 i.e., till the first policy year for which the premium was paid by the complainant. Had there been an unfortunate event in that period such as the death of the Life Assured, then the claim under the subject policy would have been honoured and would have been paid the Guaranteed Death Benefit (GDD).  The complainant has concealed the fact that he was required to pay the premium on a monthly mode for a premium paying term of 7 years, however only paid the first premium and failed to pay the remaining 6 annual instalments and further failed to revive the policy within the revival period. Also, the Complainant has also concealed the fact that Rs.1,10,988.50/- (i.e., Rs. 1.08.117.51 plus Rs. 2,870.99/- for the delayed period) was paid to him on 05.09.2017 vide Direct Credit into his ICICI Bank Account no: 106901503403 with IFSC code: ICIC0000001 and has in malafide manner sought refund for this amount again. The complainant has purposely annexed the bank statements of his State Bank of India Bank account as Annexure C-3, hence the credit entry is not reflecting in the same as the payment was credited to his ICICI Bank account no: 106901503403. Inspite of refunding the amount paid by the complainant, he has without any cause dragged the OPs into this litigation. Rest of the averments of the complainant were denied by the OPs and prayed for dismissal of the present complaint with costs.
4.           Learned counsel for the complainant tendered affidavit of complainant as Annexure CW1/A alongwith documents as Annexure C-1 and C-9 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant. On the other hand, learned counsel for the OPs tendered affidavit of Umang Kapoor, Manager Legal of the OPs-ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Company Limited as Annexure R-A alongwith documents as Annexure R-1 to R-6 and  closed evidence on behalf of the OPs.
5.           We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and carefully gone through the case file and also gone through the written arguments filed by the learned counsel for the OPs.
6.           Learned counsel for the complainant submitted that by neither extending the policy cover despite receiving premium amount for the same nor refunding the said premium amount, the OPs are deficient in providing service.
7.           On the other hand, learned counsel for the OPs while reiterating the averments contained in their written version submitted that since the premium amount alongwith interest accrued thereon, already stood refunded to the complainant i.e. Rs.1,10,988.50/- (i.e., Rs. 1.08.117.51 plus Rs. 2,870.99/- for the delayed period) on 05.09.2017 vide Direct Credit into his ICICI Bank Account no: 106901503403 with IFSC code: ICIC0000001, as such, now this complaint having been filed after a period of more than 2 ½ years is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed, especially, when the complainant has deliberately concealed the fact of receipt of this amount.
8.            It may be stated here that though the complainant in his case, while leveling allegations against the OPs in the matter have sought direction to the OPs either to review the original policy no.17574160 or in the alternative to refund the amount of Rs.1,06,436/- alongwith interest and compensation. However, it is found from Annexure R-6 dated 05.12.2020 that the OPs have already refunded the amount of Rs.1,10,988.50 ps. vide crediting the same directly in the account of the complainant through NEFT, ICICI Bank i.e. in Account No.106901503403 on 06.09.2017. This account number of ICICI Bank had been given by the complainant himself to the OPs as is evident from the ECS Debit Form dated 12.03.2013, Annexure R-1 which is signed by the complainant. During the course of arguments, when the counsel for the complainant was confronted with this fact, he stated that since the said account was not in operation, therefore, the complainant was not aware of this fact and the OPs should have informed the complainant in that regard. It may be stated here that in the face of the document Annexure R-1, the justification given by the counsel for the complainant did not merit acceptance and deserves to be rejected out-rightly. Under these circumstances, since the refund of amount which is being sought in the present complaint has already been paid by the OPs to the complainant, as far as back in September 2017, as such, this  complaint is liable to be dismissed, having been rendered infructuous.
9. In view of peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, it is held that because the refund of amount, which is being sought in the present complaint has already been paid by the OPs to the complainant, as far as back in September 2017, as explained above, as such, this complaint is dismissed, having been rendered infructuous. The parties are left to bear their own costs.  Certified copies of this order be supplied to the parties concerned, forthwith, free of cost as permissible under Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the Record Room.

 Announced:- 12.06.2023

 

(Vinod Kumar Sharma)	(Ruby Sharma)	(Neena Sandhu)
Member	Member	President