2025 Supreme(Online)(SCDRC) 35977
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Chitra – Appellant
Versus
The hdb financial services represented by its Branch Manager &2 others – Respondent
SC/33/CC/263/2017
Date of filing : 14.07.2017.
IN THE TAMILNADU STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHENNAI.
Present: Hon’ble Thiru. Justice R. SUBBIAH: PRESIDENT C.C. No.263 of 2017 Fri’day, the 28th day of March 2025 Mrs. Chitra, W/o Late N.Vetrivelan, No.10, Ganapathy Nagar, Gandhi Street, Mandharakuppam, Neyveli – 607 802. ... Complainant - Vs –
1. HDB Financial Services, Rep. by its Branch Manager, 1st Floor, Link Road-2, Cuddalore Municipality Road, TS No.1764, Block No.46, Ward No.5, Cuddalore Bus Stand Approach Road, Behind Bus Stand, Cuddalore – 607 002.
2. The HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company Ltd., HDFC Life Group Credit Protect Plus Insurance Plan, Represented by its Director, The IL&FS Financial Center, 5th Floor, Plot C-22, G.Block, Bandra –Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400 051.
3. The HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company Ltd., HDFC Life Group Credit Protect Plus Insurance Plan, Represented by its Branch Manager, 37/38, Venkatnarayana Road, 2nd Floor, Ramana Towers, Opp. ASV ‘N’, T. Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. ... Opposite Parties Counsel for the Complainant : M/s. S.L.Sudarsanam Counsel for the Opp. No.1 : Exparte (M/s. Nathan &
Associates)
Counsel for the Opp. 2&3 : M/s. P.D.Selvaraj.
This Complaint came up for final hearing on
04.03.2025, and on hearing the arguments of the counsel for the Complainant and the opposite parties 2 and 3 and upon perusing the material records, this Commission made the following :- O R D E R R.SUBBIAH J., PRESIDENT This Complaint has been filed under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as against the Opposite Parties for the following reliefs:-
(a) To direct the opposite parties 2 and 3 jointly and severally to pay a sum of Rs.20,30,318/- being the Policy amount covered by the Credit Protect Plus Master Policy bearing No. PP00054 dated 28.02.2015 based on the complainant’s claim vide No. PC003266;
(b) To pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- to the complainant towards compensation and Damages for negligence and deficiency in service committed by them;
(c) To pay a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- to the complainant towards expenses incurred; and (d) To pay the cost of entire proceedings.
2. The case of the complainant is that her husband Mr.N.Vetrivelan approached the opposite party No.1 for financial assistance for a sum of Rs.20,30,318/-. The opposite party No.1 had sanctioned the said financial assistance on 28.02.2015 vide Loan account No.881603, UCIC No.1498114 in favour of complainant’s husband N.Vetrivelan. The opposite party No.1 had informed the husband of the complainant that in order to avail the financial assistance a Credit Protect Plus Master Policy has to be obtained from their organization namely HDFC Life Insurance Company Ltd., i.e. the opposite party No.2. At the time of availing the financial assistance all the relevant documents were obtained from her husband Mr.Vetrivelan, by the opposite parties 1 and 2. The complainant’s husband was informed that the opposite party No.2 will protect the repayment of loan amount in case if there is an emergency. Based on the assurance given by the opposite parties 1 and 2, the complainant’s husband obtained loan facility from the opposite party No.1 and availed insurance policy from the opposite party No.2. Both the opposite parties 1 and 2, after having fully satisfied with all requirements and relevant vital documents of complainant’s husband including his health condition, had sanctioned loan and facilitated by providing Protection Master Policy as per their norms. No further details were sought by the opposite parties 1 and 2 from the complainant’s husband Mr.Vetrivelan.
(a) The complainant’s husband Mr.N.Vetrivelan availed Credit Protect Plus to cover the borrowed loan from the opposite party No.1 under Master Policy No.PP000054 which was commenced on 28.02.2015 for a value of Rs.20,30,318/-. Under the said policy the complainant’s husband Vetrivelan was entitled for the benefits mentioned below:-
“Insurance coverage of Rs.20,30,318/- and the