Orissa

Rayagada

CC/386/2016

Sri Palakka - Complainant(s)

Versus

and Others - Opp.Party(s)

Self

29 Jan 2018

ORDER

DISTRICT   CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL    FORUM, RAYAGADA,

STATE:  ODISHA.

C.C. Case  No. 386/ 2016.                                        Date.     29   .1. 2018.

P R E S E N T .

Dr. Aswini  Kumar Mohapatra,                                                   President

Sri GadadharaSahu, .                                                                      Member.

Smt.  Padmalaya  Mishra,                                                              Member

Mr. Panchanan Pradhan, S/O: Bana Pradhan, J.S.C.O.,  Po/Dist:Rayagada,State:  Odisha.                                                                                                                          …….Complainant

Vrs.

1.The Manager, Reliance life Insurance Company  Ltd.,  Mumbai       

2.The  Branch   Manager, Reliance life Insurance Company  Ltd.,  Rayagada(Odisha).                                                                                                                   .…..Opp.Parties

Counsel for the parties:                         

For the complainant: - Self.

For the O.P No.1   :- Sri J.K.Mohapatra, Advocate, Rayagada.

J u d g e m e n t.

        The  present dispute emerges out of the complaint petition filed by the above named complainant alleging deficiency in service  against  afore mentioned O.Ps towards  non receipt  of balance surrender  amount a sum  of Rs.11,143.88   against deposited amount  a sum of Rs.97,500/- from  September, 2010  till March, 2016 half yearly  premium paid by the complainant @ Rs.7,500/- in  each  premium.

On being noticed the O.Ps filed written version through their learned counsel and submitted that the complaint  is baseless, unwarranted, wrong and puerile in nature  and is denied disputed by the complainant.   The O.P taking other grounds in the written version   sought to dismiss the complaint as it is not maintainable  under the C.P. Act, 1986. It is therefore prayed that the complaint may kindly be dismissed in favour of the O.P. and against the complainant.

The O.Ps appeared and filed their written version.  Heard arguments from the  learned counsel for  the  complainant  and O.Ps.    Perused the record, documents, written version  filed by the parties. 

The  parties   advanced arguments vehemently touching the points both on the facts  as well as on  law.

         FINDINGS.

            On perusal of the record it is revealed that there is no dispute that the complainant was a policy holder bearing No.17945311 under  Reliance Traditional Super Invest Assure plan.   Further  there is no disputes the  above  policy  term and premium payment term   is 20 years.   Again  there is no dispute the complainant has  paid total premium Rs. 97,500/-  for the period from 21.09.2010  to  till March, 2016  towards  13  Nos. half yearly  premium  @ Rs. 7,500/- each premium. 

The main grievance of the complainant is that  he has received a sum of Rs.86,356.00 against the  payment of Rs. 97,500/- less than the amount paid by him i.e. Rs. 11,143.88 and when asked the reason the O.P. No.2  has  stated  that it is  the surrender value of the said policy and the complainant  is  not entitled anything more. Hence the  C.C. petition filed by the complainant  to get  the  balance amount.

          The  O.Ps in their written version preliminary objection  para No. 11 © clearly  mentioned that  the complainant  has  paid  premium 13 times half yearly @ Rs.7,500/- in each premium  after which the complainant approached the O.P. for surrendering  the policy  by submitting the  payout form for interim surrender of the said policy as on 13.10.2016.  It is pertinent  to note  here  that the pay out form clearly mentioned the terms and conditions stating that the surrender amount of the said policy will be payable after deduction of the allocation charges based on the effective NAV rates and also mentioned the  surrender amount of Rs.86,142/- that will be payable to the complainant.  The complainant while submitting  the said payout form had duly signed it as on Dt. 13.10.2016.  Hence when a person signs any document, it is presumed that he had read and understood the document and consented to its content  which is marked as Annexure-I.

          Further  the O.Ps submitted  that  upon receipt   of the request   for surrender of the policy from  the  complainant on Dt. 13.10.2016,  the full  surrender amount Rs. 86,356.00  of the  policy  had  transferred to  the  complainant vide on line TRF vide HDFC NEFT Ref No. N292160197696261 on Dt. 18.10.2016  in the account of the complainant which is marked as Annexure-II. Again the O.Ps argued  that the allegation of the complainant regarding less surrender amount paid is  groundless and against the policy terms and  conditions,.

          It is to reiterate that the policy documents as  well as  the payout form clearly stated that the surrender amount will be payable after  deduction of the allocation  charges and the O.Ps had duly  paid the  appropriate surrender value of Rs. 86,356.00 to the complainant.   Afore-mentioned facts establish  that nothing  is either  due or legally recoverable by the complainant from the O.Ps and O.Ps have duly complied with the terms and conditions of the policy  contract.  In the ligjht of above facts and contract no cause of action ever arose against  the O.Ps as the present  complaint does not  raise any “Consumer Dispute” and there is no deficiency  on the part of the O.Ps.  The  complainant  has neither a legal  basis nor a  valid cause of action  against the O.Ps to file the present complaint before the  forum as the  O.Ps rightly calculated the Surrender value and paid to the complainant in time. Hence this forum has not warranted to interfere in to  the present complaint. That the modus operandi of the O.Ps  is different from any insurance sectors and it earnestly follows the rules and  regulations passed by the IRDA and further  functions of its business are carried in accordance with the settled principles of law.   The grievances of the complaint is unworthy of credence.

We are completely agreed with views taken  and  the documents filed by the O.Ps in  the present case. Hence  this forum  feel the complainant is not entitled any  relief from this forum and   liable to be dismissed. To meet the ends of justice the following order is passed.

ORDER.

In  resultant the complaint petition is hereby  dismissed. Parties are left to bear their own cost.    Accordingly the case  is disposed of.

Dictated and corrected by me               Pronounced on this        29 ^th.   Day of   January,  2018.

 

Member.                                             Member.                                                             President