THE DISTRICT CONSUMER’S FORUM: KURNOOL
Present: Sri.Y.Reddappa Reddy, M.A., L.L.M., President,
And
Smt. S.Nazeerunnisa, B.A., B.L., Lady Member
Thursday the 29TH day of January, 2015
C.C.No.96/2013
Between:
K.Veerabhdrappa,
S/o K.Veerappa,
Retired, Divisional Engineer, BSNL,
R/o D.No.45/115A, Narasimha Reddy Nagar,
Kurnool-518 004. …Complainant
-Vs-
1. The Manager,
ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Company Limited,
Vinod Silk Mills Compound,
Chakravarthy Ashok Nagar, Ashok Road,
Kandivali (E), Mumbai-400 101.
2. The Manager,
ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Company Limited,
2nd Floor, Alankar Plaza, Park Road,
Kurnool-518 001. …OPPOSITE PARties
This complaint is coming on this day for orders in the presence of Sri.B.Amarnath, Advocate for complainant and Sri.Allagadda Chandrasekhara Rao and Sri.Kadiyala Rama Pullaiah, Advocates for opposite party No.1 and opposite party No.2 called absent and set exparte and upon perusing the material papers on record, the Forum made the following.
ORDER
(As per Smt. S.Nazeerunnisa, Lady Member,)
C.C. No.96/2013
1. This complaint is filed under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 praying:-
(a)To directing the opposite parties 1 and 2 to pay the entire policy amount of Rs.1,45,953-88 with benefits and interest thereon at 24% per annum from the date of surrender of policy to till the date of realization.
(b)To pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards compensation for mental agony suffered by the complainant.
(c)To pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards costs.
(d)To grant such other relief or reliefs which the Honourable Forum deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
2. The brief facts of the complaint are as follows:- The complainant is a senior citizen by name Kamisetty Veerabhadrappa, Residing at H.no.45/115A, Narasimha Reddy Nagar, Kurnool. On 31.03.2007 he insured his life with opposite party No.1 through opposite party No.2 under the policy “Life Link Super Pension Scheme” with single premium mode of Rs.1,00,000/-. The opposite party No.1 issued policy No.05123883 in favour of the complainant. The policy attained majority on 10.04.2012. The complainant wanted to get the policy discharged on 09-04-2012 before the vesting date, and he sent his friend Mr.K.Anil Kumar to the ICIC life Insurance office at Kurnool on 09-04-2012 got know the details for surrender of the policy. His friend informed that opposite party No.2 Office Assistant has advised to surrender the policy after the vesting date of 10-04-2012 so as to get the full surrender value without any deductions. Accordingly the complainant along with his friend Mr.K.Anil Kumar went to ICICI Office, Kurnool and surrender the policy on 11-04-2002. The Office Assistant issued the acknowledgment portion of the surrender application and informed that the complainant will get the payment within 10 to 15 days, which is also mention on the acknowledgment slip. The complainant waited for more than 15 days but did not receive any payment from the opposite parties. The complainant approached opposite party No.2and then opposite party No.2 asked to wait for some more days. But he did not receive any reply. The complainant made a complaint to the insurance ombudsman on 05-05-2012, but the said authority stated that the complaint matter is beyond the purview of the insurance ombudsman. The complainant forced to give a lawyer notice on 04-06-2012 to opposite parties. Opposite party No.1 sent a reply dated 22-06-2012 asked the complainant to furnish a copy of acknowledgment slip given by opposite party No.2 while surrendering the policy. The complaint sent it through DTDC on 06-07-2012. Finally the opposite party No.1 denied the payment of policy matured value of Rs.1,45,953.88 vide their letter 31-07-2012 stated that surrender of the policy will not be allowed post original vesting/maturity date of the policy. The complainant took the policy from opposite party company with fond of hope that the policy amount will be helpful to him after his retirement. There is negligence and deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties in setting the claim of the complainant and caused mental agony to the complainant. Hence the complaint.
3. Opposite party No.1 filed written version stating that this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint. The dispute raise is not a consumer dispute 2 (1) (e) under consumer protection Act. The complaint is barred by limitation. The opposite parties issued policy bearing No.05123883 in favour of the complainant is not under dispute. It is submitted that the complainant approached the opposite parties on 11-04-2012 with surrender request after the policy attained its maturity on 10-04-2012. Prior to the date of maturity the opposite parties sent a letter dated 16-03-2012 along with an annuity quotation and provide him an option to the complainant, but the complainant did not respond, as per the terms and conditions of the policy the surrender of the policy is not allowed post the original vesting maturity date of the policy. As the complainant has failed to approach the opposite parties reviewed the policy within free look period of 15 days before the maturity date available to the complainant. It is further submitted that the policy is a contract between the policy holder and insurance company and the parties must bound to its terms and conditions. The complainant has not chosen any of the annuity option quoted by the opposite parties as such the opposite parties are unable to release the annuity amount to the complainant. There is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties. Hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed against the opposite parties.
Opposite party No.2 called absent and set exparte.
4. On behalf of the complainant filed Ex.A1 to Ex.A8 are marked and sworn affidavit of complainant and third party affidavit of Mr.K.Anil Kumar is filed. On behalf of opposite parties filed Ex.B1 to Ex.B9 are marked and sworn affidavit of opposite party No.1 is filed.
5. Both sides filed written arguments.
6. Now the points that arise for consideration are:
- Whether the complaint is barred by period of limitation?
- Whether the dispute is a consumer dispute?
- Whether there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties?
- Whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs as prayed for?
- To what relief?
7. POINTS i and ii:- Admittedly the complainant Sri.K.Veerabhdrappa took the policy from opposite party No.1 through opposite party No.2 under Ex.B2 proposal form and its terms and conditions is marked as Ex.A8 B3. The policy is “Life Time Super Pension Policy” its maturity/vesting date is 10-04-2012. The complainant surrenders the policy document on 11-04-2012. The opposite party No.2 Office Assistant issued acknowledgement slip dated 11-04-2012 under Ex.A1. It is the case of opposite parties that the policy was issued in the year 2007 and the document received as 24-04-2007, the complainant failed to approach the opposite parties during the commencement of the policy. The complaint filed in the year 2013 after expiry of 6 years. Therefore the present complaint is barred by limitation under section 24 (A) Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the period of limitation to file a complaint before the District Forum is two years from the date on which the cause of action has arise. In the present case the opposite parties did not made maturity payment to the complainant on surrender of the policy bond on 11-04-2012. There is no dispute with regard to issuance of policy. The dispute arises regarding the non-payment of vesting maturity amount to the complainant. The complaint in filed on 02-07-2013. The complaint is well in time and it is not barred by period of limitation.
8. POINT No.ii:- It is the case of opposite parties that the dispute arises in the above complaint is not a consumer dispute and this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. In the present case admittedly the policy bearing No.05123883 is issued in favour of the complainant. The consumer disputes relate as to goods and services availed of. It is also necessary that there must be defects in goods or deficiency of service. Services as defined under section 2 (1) (o) “service” means service of any description which is made available to potential (users and include, but not limited to, the provision of) facilities in connection with banking, financing, insurance, transport, processing, supply of electrical or other energy, board or lodging or both, (housing construction,) entertainment, amusement or the purveying of news or other information, but does not include the rendering of any service free of charge or under a contract of personal service. The services include the insurance services also. Under Section 2 (1) (e) “Consumer dispute” means a dispute where the person against whom a complaint has been made, denies or disputes the allegations contained in the complaint. In the present case the complainant paid insurance premium of Rs.1,00,000/- to the opposite parties towards insurance policy. Hence the complainant is a consumer under section 2(1) (d) and the dispute is a consumer dispute under section 2 (1) (e) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
9. POINIS iii and iv:- Admittedly the complainant obtained single premium unit linked pension insurance (Ex.B2) policy from the opposite parties in April, 2007. The complainant in his sworn affidavit it is clearly stated that it is a single premium policy with the vesting date as 10-04-2012 he sent his friend on 09-04-2012 to the Kurnool Office opposite party No.2 to know details to surrender the policy. The Officer Assistant informed the requirement and also suggested to surrender the policy on 11-04-2012 instead of on 10-04-2012 so that there is no deduction of charges. Accordingly the complainant surrendered it on 11-04-2012 and the Office Assistant promptly issued the acknowledgement under Ex.A1. The complainant filed third party affidavit of Mr.K.Anil Kumar wherein it is stated that on 09-04-2012 on the re quest of complainant he enquired about the surrender of policy, on verification of policy the opposite party No.2 assistant informed that the complainant surrender policy after 10-04-2012. Then the complainant will get full surrender value (i.e.,) 100% fund value. Accordingly on 11-04-2012 he also went along with the complainant to the opposite party No.2 and surrendered it. The company official issued acknowledgement and informed that the payment will be made within 10 to 15 days, but subsequently the opposite parties did not pay the maturity amount to the complainant. The complainant sent a letter to opposite party No.2 and requested to pay back his matured policy amount. It is marked as Ex.A2. The complaint was forced to lodge complaint dated 05-05-2012 before insurance ombudsman, which is marked as Ex.A6, but the said authority informed that the complaint matter is beyond the purview of the insurance ombudsman. After words the complainant issued legal notice dated 04-06-2012, it is marked as Ex.A3 = Ex.B8. The opposite party No.1 gave reply dated 22-06-2012, which is marked as Ex.B9 = Ex.A4. The complainant sent the acknowledgement Ex.A1 to opposite party No.1 through DTDC on 06-07-2012 subsequently the opposite party No.1 addressed a letter dated 31-07-2012 Ex.B7 = Ex.A5 to the complainant stated that surrender of the policy will not be allowed and advised the complainant to invest the amount further with them. The learned counsel appearing for the complainant contended that the complainant is a heart patient and he does not want to continue the policy for further period. Due to the negligent attitude of opposite parties caused mental agony to the complainant.
It is the case of opposite parties that the opposite parties already intimated to the complainant on 16-03-2012, prior to maturity date of policy, and providing quotation to decide with an annuity quotation which is marked as Ex.B4, as per terms and conditions of the policy the surrender of the policy is not allowed post the original vesting maturity date of the policy. The complainant surrendered the policy on 11-04-2012. The opposite parties gave replies to the notices of complainant Ex.B9 and Ex.B7 and informed the same to the complainant. The complainant also filed complaint before the ombudsman and also before Lokadalat. Ex.B1 is the notice dated 28-01-2013 issued by Lokadalat, Kurnool. The complainant has not chosen any of the annuity option quoted by the opposite parties as such the opposite parties is unable to release the annuity amount to the complainant. The learned counsel appearing to opposite party No.1 submitted a decision reported in (2000) I SCC Page 66 Ravneet Singh Bagga -Vs- KLM Royal Dutch Airlines where in it was held that “the deficiency of service cannot be alleged without attributing fault, imperfection, shortcoming or inadequacy in the quality, nature and manner of performance which is required to be performed by a person in pursuance of a contract or otherwise in relation to any service. The cited case is not applicable to the present case on hand.
Admittedly the complainant obtained policy bearing No.05123883 from opposite party No.1 through opposite party No.2. There is no dispute with regard to surrender of policy bond on 11-04-2012 and acknowledged the same by opposite party No.2 official under Ex.A1. There was exchange of letters and notice between the complainant and opposite parties regarding the non-payment of maturity amount. The terms and conditions of policy is marked as Ex.B3 = Ex.A8 under the condition of 7 (2) under the head of applicability of (NAV) Net Asset (value) the cut-off time (such as premiums, surrenders withdrawals, etc.) should be received on the same day 4.15 P.M. If the request, instruction is received after the cutoff time, then NAV of the next day or the due date whichever is later shall be applicable. In the present case the complainant friend Mr.K.Anil Kumar made enquires about the surrender of policy in the office of opposite party No.2. As per the instructions of opposite party No.2 official Assistant, the complainant surrendered the policy document on 11-04-2012. The policy was matured on 10-04-2012, the very next day the complainant surrendered the policy, the opposite parties mentioned the options in their letter dated 31-07-2012 Ex.B7 = Ex.A5, without the consent of complainant, the opposite party invested his maturity amount for further investment is unjust and not proper. According to their own condition, if any request or instruction is received with regard to surrender, with draw, and premiums, after the cutoff time, the very next day shall be applicable for Net Asset value. As per condition No.4 the policy may be surrendered any time after three policy years have elapsed. The surrender value payable is the fund value after deducting the following surrender charges.
3 Years | 4% |
4 Years | 2% |
5 Years and above | 0% |
The complainant obtained single premium policy for a period of 5 years, after 5 years is completed and its maturity date is 10-04-2012. The complainant surrendered it on 11-04-2012, the very next day of maturity date. Though the complainant surrendered it on the very next day, the opposite parties did not settle the claim and compel him for further investment without the consent of the complainant, the opposite parties had no right to compel him to continue with them. As per condition No.4 of policy the insured can surrendered any time after three years have elapsed subject to deductions but after 5 years the opposite parties ought to pay the full maturity amount without any deductions. As seen from the third party affidavit of Mr.K.Anil Kumar on behalf of complainant and all the material on record it is clearly shows that the opposite parties intentionally did not settle the claim of complainant.
We consider all the material available on record we found that there is a deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties. The complainant is entitled for the maturity amount of Rs.1,45,953.88 Ps. Due to the negligent attitude of opposite parties the complainant, who is a senior citizen suffered mental agony.
10. POINT No.v:- The complainant is entitled for the maturity amount of Rs.1,45,953.88 ps. With interest at 9% per annum from the date of maturity i.e., 10-04-2012 till the date of realization and further entitled of Rs.5,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.1,000/- as costs of the complaint.
11. In the result, the complaint is partly allowed directing the opposite parties jointly and severally to pay policy maturity amount of Rs.1,45,953.88ps. With interest at 9% per annum from the date of maturity i.e., 10-04-2012 till the date of realization and further entitled of Rs.5,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.1,000/- as costs of the complaint. Time for compliance is one month from the date of receipt of this order.
Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the open bench on this the 29th day of January, 2015.
Sd/- Sd/-
LADY MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Witnesses Examined
For the complainant:- Nil For the opposite parties:- Nil
List of exhibits marked for the co mplainant:-
Ex.A1 Policy Surrender Acknowledgement issued by opposite party
No.2.
Ex.A2 Office copy of Complaint lodged by complainant to opposite
party No.2.
Ex.A3 Office copy of Legal Notice dated 04-06-2012.
Ex.A4 Reply Notice issued by opposite party No.1 dated 22-06-2012.
Ex.A5 Reply Notice issued by opposite party No.1 dated 31-07-2012.
Ex.A6 Office copy of Complaint dated 05-05-2012 lodged before
Insurance Ombudsmen.
Ex.A7 Reply Letter dated 24-05-2012.
Ex.A8 Policy Terms and Conditions.
List of exhibits marked for the opposite parties:-
Ex.B1 Photo copy of Notice dated 28-01-2013.
Ex.B2 Photo copy of Policy Document.
Ex.B3 Photo copy of Policy Terms and Conditions.
Ex.B4 Photo copy of Letter dated 16-03-2012.
Ex.B5 Photo copy of Letter dated 09-05-2013.
Ex.B6 Photo copy of Complaint lodged by complainant to opposite
party No.2.
Ex.B7 Photo copy of Reply Notice issued by opposite party No.1 dated 31-07-2012.
Ex.B8 Photo copy of Legal Notice dated 04-06-2012.
Ex.B9 Photo copy of Reply Notice issued by opposite party No.1 dated 22-06-2012.
Sd/- Sd/-
LADY MEMBER PRESIDENT
// Certified free copy communicated under Rule 4 (10) of the
A.P.S.C.D.R.C. Rules, 1987//
Copy to:-
Complainant and Opposite parties :
Copy was made ready on :
Copy was dispatched on :
