BEFORE THE A.P.STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: HYDERABAD.
F.A.No.814/2013 in C.C.No.151/2011,District Forum, Ananthapur.
Between:
- Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Rep. by its Branch Manager, Thakai Towers
Near Venkateswara Swamy Temple
Railway Feeder Road, Anantapur.
- Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Rep. by its Manager, Regd. & Head Office,
GE Plaza, Airport Road, Yerawada
Pune 411 006, Maharastra. ..Appellants/
Opp.parties 1 & 2
And
- A.Ramanjanappa @ A.Ramanjaneyulu
-
-
Rachappabavi Veedhi, Kalyandurg
Anantapur District. Respondent/
- The Branch Manager,
Sri Andhra Pragathi Grameena Bank
Bhoopasamudram Branch
Bank Insurance Division,
Bhoopasamudram, Rayadurg Mandal,
Anantapur District. Respondent/
O.P. 3
(2nd respondent is not necessary party to this
Appeal)
Counsel for the Appellants: Mr.Srinivas Karra
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr.K.Parandamachary
QUORUM: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, PRESIDENT.
SRI S.BHUJANGA RAO, HON’BLE MEMBER.
AND
SRI R.LAKSHMINARASIMHA RAO, HON’BLE MEMBER.
MONDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST,
TWO THOUSAND FOURTEEN
Oral Order ( Per Hon’ble Sri Justice GopalakrishnaTamada, President.)
***
Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Company Limited is the appellant and this appeal is directed against the orders dated 27-5-2013 in C.C.No.151/2011 on the file of District Forum, Anantapur whereby the complaint filed by the respondent No.1 was partly allowed and the appellants were directed to pay an amount of Rs.75,000/-(the first premium amount which was paid by the first respondent) with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of taking policy i.e. 05-3-2008 till the date of realization.
The brief facts that led to the filing of the complaint are that the complaint was filed by the first respondent U/s.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 before the District Forum stating that he paid an amount of Rs.75,000/- through the third opposite party on 05-3-2008 and at the time when he paid the said amount, he was assured that he will be paid double the amount after three years. After three years, he approached the opposite parties to pay an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- and the opposite parties paid only surrender value of Rs.7,279/- vide cheque bearing No.386377 drawn on Axis Bank, Pune. The complainant got issued a notice to the opposite parties to which 2nd opposite party issued reply with false allegations. Hence the complainant approached the District Forum and filed the complaint for a direction to the opposite parties to pay Rs.1,50,000/- towards policy amount, Rs.10,000/- towards mental agony, Rs10,000/- towards deficiency of service, Rs.5,000/- towards costs in total Rs.1,75,000/- to be paid with interest @ 12% p.a.
The same was resisted by the opposite parties stating that the policy is a Unit linked policy and the annual premium is Rs.75,000/- for a sum assured of Rs.3,75,000/-. However the complainant paid only one premium of Rs.75,000/- though he has to pay the premium of Rs.75,000/- for 10 years as per the terms and conditions of the policy. It is further submitted by the opposite parties that the complainant paid only one instalment and the balance instalments were not paid and in those circumstances, when respondent No.1 approached them, they paid an amount of Rs.7,279/- towards surrender value by way of cheque and submitted that there is no deficiency of service.
During the course of hearing, Exs.A1 to A6 were marked on behalf of the complainant/respondent No.1 and Exs.B1 to B8 were marked on behalf of the appellants. Having considered the entire material on record, the District Forum directed the insurance company to pay an amount of Rs.75,000/- i.e. the amount which was paid by the first respondent/complainant towards first premium. Ofcourse, the District Forum awarded the said amount to be paid with interest at 12% p.a. from the date when the said policy was taken.
As stated supra, the said order is under challenge before us.
Heard.
May be it is true that only the first instalment of Rs.75,000/- was paid by the first respondent/complainant. The District Forum has attributed malafides on the part of the agent of the appellants and as per the orders passed by the District Forum, the agent might have misrepresented to the first respondent stating that if an amount of Rs.75,000/- is paid, he would get Rs.1,50,000/- after three years. In fact the basic principle behind this Act is to apply the principles of natural justice and if we take the same into consideration, apparently the first respondent has parted with an amount of Rs.75,000/- , his hard earned money, and for the misdeeds of the agents, he should not suffer loss.
In those circumstances, we agree with the orders passed by the District Forum and accordingly confirm the order of the District Forum whereby it directed the appellants to pay an amount of Rs.75,000/- to the first respondent. So far as the direction with regard to payment of interest is concerned, we are of the view that interest at 12% p.a. is on the high side and accordingly we reduce the same to 9% p.a. Excepting the above modification, in all other aspects, this appeal stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Time for compliance four weeks.
Sd/-PRESIDENT.
Sd/-MEMBER.
Sd/-MEMBER.
JM Dt.11-8-2014.
