(1.) -AGGRIEVED by the order passed by the District Forum and affirmed by the State Commission, allowing the complaint against the petitioner, this petition has been filed by the Petitioner, Chief Post Master General, Punjab, who was the opposite party before the District Forum where the respondent / complainant had filed a complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of the petitioner.
(2.) UNDISPUTED facts of the case are that the respondent/complainant had purchased a Postal Life Insurance Policy on 24. 11. 1994 and he was paying a monthly premium of Rs. 175. It was the case of the complainant that, in all, he was to make deposit of Rs. 21,000 against the Policy cover of Rs. 20,000, hence the petitioner has overcharged by Rs. 1,000, for which seeking the refund he approached the petitioner and when the matter was not getting sorted out, a complaint was filed before the District Forum, who allowed the complaint and directed the petitioner to refund Rs. 1,000 charged in excess along with interest @ 9% p. a. from the date of maturity till the date of payment, and cost of Rs. 500. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner has filed an appeal before the State Commission, which was dismissed, hence this revision petition before us.
(3.) WE heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner as also perused the material on record. We have very carefully gone through the Postal Life Insurance Policy in which it is clearly stated that premium is Rs. 175 per month. The Policy was to mature in October 2002 and the complaint was filed in 2007 after receipt of the maturity amount. Having gone through the rules relating to Endowment Assurance as well as Policy issued, which in terms of law, is a contract between the parties, we are left in no doubt that the petitioner did no wrong in charging Rs. 175 per month as premium as clearly stated in the Policy itself, total of which during the life of the Policy would come to over Rs. 21,000 even when the risk covered was Rs. 20,000 only.