DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM EAST Govt of NCT Delhi
CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, 1st FLOOR, SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI 110092
Consumer complaint no. - 805/2011
Date of Institution - 17/10/2011
Date of Order - 05/08/2016
In matter of
Mr Vijay Pal, adult
s/o Sh Chattar Pal
R/o- S-47, Sunder Lok,
Shakarpur, Delhi-110092………………………………..…………….Complainant
Vs
The Manager
The Aviva Life Insurance
RO- 2nd Floor, Prakash Deep Building
7, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi 110001……………….………………..Respondent
Complainant’s Advocate - Sh DK Katariya
Opponent’s Advocate - Arvind Bansal & Aman Raj Gandhi
Corum-Sh Sukhdev Singh-President
Dr P N Tiwari - Member
Mrs Harpreet Kaur- Member
Order by Dr P N Tiwari, Member
Brief Facts of the case
Mr Vijay Pal, complainant who is a graduate and businessman by profession, took a Saver Guard Policy from OP through their agent and the said policy was issued to complainant on 13/05/2008 vide policy no. ASV2008162 after paying a yearly premium of a sum of Rs 12,000/-. The tenure of this policy was of 240 months. The complainant was paying regular premium. The premium was deducted through ABN AMRO bank who had linked his saving bank account with OP.
Complainant received a telephonic message from OP on 04/05/2011 that the premium of the said policy had not been paid yet. After inquiring in the office of OP, complainant came to know that OP had imposed two another policies on him as Aviva Young Scholar policy vide policy no. AYS2666245 and Easy Life plus vide policy no. EPG1063423. He submitted that these two policies were imposed by OP without his intimation and his approval. He further submitted that he was never asked by OP to take additional two policies. More so, premium was also deducted from the bank which complainant had linked for deducting premium of first policy. OP had deducted a sum of Rs 15,000/- and 12,000/- for these two additional policies. Complainant pleaded that a demand of Rs 36,000/- was made by OP for depositing the outstanding premium balance at the early otherwise his deposited amount would be forfeited. Hence, complainant deposited the outstanding amount to OP. By issuing two additional policies, OP had cheated complainant and did unfair trade practice.
Complainant submitted that he had no liability to pay the outstanding premium, so sent a legal notice to OP on 09/05/2011 for knowing the reason of issuing two policies and deducting premium amount through his bank account. But OP did not reply. Thereafter, he filed this complaint. He claimed for refund of a sum of Rs 39,000/- with 24% interest from May 2008. He has also claimed compensation of Rs 50,000/- with appropriate cost of litigation.
After scrutinizing the complaint and documents filed by complainant, notice was served. OP filed their written statement with evidence on affidavit denying all the facts narrated by complainant. OP stated that the complainant had submitted all the facts wrongly before this Forum, intentionally. He has raised issuing of two policies wrongly by OP. OP had submitted detail facts. OP pleaded that complainant was a graduate deals in business and an income tax payee. He has invested under different policies for his family. He himself has filled all the policy proposal forms and gave written authority to deduct the policy premiums accordingly. The details submitted are us under—
*Easy Life Plus Unit Linked policy no. EPG1063423 was issued to complainant after prior intimation and full satisfaction by him on 17/12/2003 which he surrendered on 03/08/2009. This policy had tenure of 15 years and had maturity date 17/12/2018. Under this policy, surrender was not applicable. Complainant opted a monthly payment plan of Rs 1000/- through ECS. OP submitted a signed Policy Proposal Form along with complainant’s request to stop.
The Exhibit RW1/1 and RW1/2,RW1/3 and RW1/4 were submitted before this Forum.
**Save Guard Policy no. ASV2008162 was issued to him in May 2008 after he completed and duly attested and signed policy proposal form bearing no. NNU12157715 as submitted Exhibit RW2/1 to Exhibit RW2/8 which are on record. Under this policy, a sum assured was 1,20,000/-in 20 years. He opted yearly premium of Rs 12,000/-. Under this policy, investment risk is borne by policy holder.
***Aviva Young Scholar Plan, policy no. AYS2666145 was issued to him on 26/08/2009 after he submitted duly filled and signed policy proposal form vide no. NUP13014603 as Exhibit RW3/1 to RW3/10. This policy was taken for his 5 yr old daughter’s name. The tenure of this policy was for 20 years from 2009 with annual premium Rs 15,000/- up to 20 years.
So, OP submitted that all the three policies details issued to complainant on his request and after his satisfaction and duly signing declaration, policies were issued to him. He had given his saving bank account details to OP for timely deduction of policy premium. OP had also submitted that they had never imposed any policy without his prior approval, permission /intimation. As per his declaration, OP had deducted premium of two policies from complainant’s ABN AMRO Bank a/c no. 228791 against his ID and Advisor Declaration form, filled by complainant on 03/05/2008. OP had also submitted that complainant had not paid his premium of a sum of Rs 12,000/- till date and submitted all the incorrect facts before this Forum.
OP further submitted that submitted facts in complaint, and OP’s written reply, complaint be dismissed. Complainant submitted evidences on affidavit and are on record.
Arguments were heard and order was reserved.
After hearing arguments, scrutinizing all the facts and evidences submitted before us, it is necessary to see the relevant INSURANCE LAWS, (under “Principles of Insurance Laws”) forwarded by Former Hon. C.J.I Sh Rangnath Misra, Supreme Court and Hon. SV Joga Rao, which are applicable in this case.
These are as under-
1-Nature of insurance Contract,
2-Insurable Interest
3-Duty of disclosure
4-Applicability of Sec. 45 of insurance Laws.
1-Nature of insurance Contract -
“ Contract of Insurance is basically governed by rules, which form part of general law of contract. Contract of Insurance are not confined to contract for the payment of sum of money but included contracts for some benefit corresponding to the payment of a sum of money. Insurance policy is the exclusive record of the insurance contract. Both parties are bound by the terms of the policy issued in standard form.
2-Insurable Interest-
In the words of J. Lawrance in a classic case – LUCENA VS CRAUFURD- SC1Taunt.325(1806)2BGPNR269 said “Insurance is a contract by which the one party in consideration of a price paid to him adequate to the risk, becomes security to the other that he shall not suffer loss, damage or prejudice by the happening of the perils specified to certain things which may be exposed to them.”
3-Duty of disclosure –
Insured has to disc lose all the facts in the policy proposal form at the time of filling the form and signing it. If insured has failed to disclose the facts which he must have known were relevant for the insurers to know. Assured is under the duty to disclose correctly to insurer.
4-Applicability of Sec. 45 of insurance Laws -
This act is restrictive in nature. It lay down the following conditions-
a)-the statement must be on the material matter or must suppress facts which it was material to disclose.
b)-the suppression must be fraudulently made by the policy holder.
c)-the policy holder must have known at the time of making the statement that it was false or that it suppressed facts which it was material to disclose. Burden is cast on the insurer to show that the statement was on a material matter or facts have been suppressed which it was material for the policy holder to disclose.
Considering all the facts and evidences on record in this case, it is clear that complainant has not come with clean hands before the Forum for his grievances.
Ref.- (Sangli Ram vs General Manager United India Insurance Co. Ltd.) –II(1994)CPJ444.
Considering all the facts and evidences on record which are submitted in different way to waste his and Forum’s time. Though this complaint deserve to be dismissed with cost, we give one opportunity to complainant if he wish to continue his policies in future as per the terms of the policies, he should clear all the pending dues of premium to OP within 30 days from the receiving of this order as policies are not yet matured. If he fails to comply the order, the complaint will stand dismissed with cost. The complainant then will have to pay a sum of Rs 10,000/-in the Consumer Legal Aid Account of the Forum which can be utilized by the poor and needy litigants in future.
The punitive cost has been imposed because he is a qualified and educated person dealing in a good business since long and is an income tax payee. Filing this complaint, wasted his and Forum’s time as this was an oldest pending case before us.
The order copy be sent to the parties as per act and file be consigned to the record room.
Mrs Harpreet Kaur- Member (Dr) P N Tiwari -Member
Shri Sukhdev Singh - President
