GURMAIL SINGH S/O JOG RAJ, POWER OF ATTORNEY OF GURVINDER PATHANIA S/O JOG RAJ, VILLAGE NANGALBIHALA TEHSIL MUKERIAN, DISTRICT Vs. AVIVIA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY INDIA LTD. & 3 ORS. THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, HEAD OFFICE SECTOR ROAD, OPP. GOLF COURSE DLF, PHASE V, SECTOR 43, GURGAON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the order of the State Commission Punjab dated 23.11.2015 in First Appeal No. 68 of 2012 whereby the State Commission confirmed the order of the District Forum dismissing the consumer complaint filed by the petitioner.

(2.) The revision petition was initially filed in the name of Gurmail Singh through Power of Attorney Gurvinder Pathiana. Subsequently, on coming to know about the inadvertent error, the petitioner moved an application for amendment of title of the revision petition. The amendment was allowed vide order dated 27.09.2016.

(3.) Briefly put the facts relevant for the disposal of this revision petition are that petitioner filed a consumer complaint before District Forum alleging that petitioner had an account with opposite party no.3 bank. On being persuaded by one Jitender Singh, relationship manager of the bank, the petitioner complainant purchased an insurance policy from the opposite party Aviva Life Insurance Company Limited (OP No.1 & 2). According to the petitioner, the policy was for a period of four years and the premium was Rs.5,00,000.00 per annum. The first premium was paid on 16.06.2006 but opposite party no. 1 & 2 did not deliver the policy to the complainant. It is alleged that petitioner paid annual premium of Rs.5,00,000.00 each for four years. After the expiry of four years, the petitioner contacted opposite party no. 1 & 2 to get back the policy amount. OP No. 1 & 2 instead of paying the maturity amount of the policy delivered a cheque of Rs.10,00,000.00 to the petitioner in the month of July 2009. The petitioner was told that if he wanted to continue with the policy, he will have to make payment till 16.06.2042. The complainant protested that he was already 59 years and how he could be expected to continue the policy till 2042 and asked for refund of the balance premium paid by him along with interest. The opposite party insurance company declined to return the remaining amount. Claiming this to be deficiency in service, the petitioner raised a consumer dispute by filing consumer complaint before District Forum Hoshiarpur.