BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AMRITSAR.
Consumer Complaint No. 45 of 2016
Date of Institution: 01.2.2016
Date of Decision: 05.07.2016
S. Balkar Singh son of S. Bakshish Singh, resident of village Salodeen, P.O.Khatrai Kalan,Tehsil Ajnala District Amritsar
Complainant
Versus
- Aviva Life Insurance Company India Ltd., Aviva Tower, Sector Road, Opposite Gold Course, DLF Phase V, Sector 43, Gurgaon through its General Manager/Principal Officer/Person over all Incharge
- Aviva Life Insurance Company India Ltd., having its Registered office at 2nd Floor, Prakashdeep Building, 7 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi-11, through its General Manager/Principal Officer/Person over all Incharge
- Aviva Life Insurance Company India Ltd., SCO 25, Second Floor,B-Block,Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar through its Manager/Principal Officer/Person over all Incharge
Opposite Parties
Complaint under section 11 and 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended upto date.
Present: For the Complainant: Sh.Neeraj Brahmi, Advocate
For Opposite Parties : Ex-parte
Coram
Sh.S.S.Panesar, President
Ms.Kulwant Kaur Bajwa, Member
Mr.Anoop Sharma, Member
Order dictated by:
Sh.S.S. Panesar, President.
1. Balkar Singh has brought the instant complaint under section 11 & 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 on the allegations that Avtar Singh having agent code No. PSAS0184 canvassed the complainant for insurance and compelled the complainant to purchase insurance policy wherein the policy term is for a period of 10 years but the insured/policy holder has to pay only three annual premium of Rs. 1 lac for initial three years from the commencement of policy , in all Rs. 3 lacs. Thereafter no further amount was required to be paid by the insured/policy holder. But even then the policy still remain in force till its maturity and the insured/policy holder is entitled to get all the benefits on maturity date of policy. It is pertinent to mention that the complainant was also apprised by authorized insurance agent S. Avtar Singh that even after completion of the first three policy years, the insured/policy holder may even surrender the policy and he is entitled to get three annual premium paid by him i.e. Rs. 3 lacs alongwith all the benefit/growth amount available thereon. Initially the complainant was reluctant to go in for insurance but on the persuasion of the agent/opposite parties, the insurance policy was issued in the name of the complainant on 16.3.2009. The complainant received the policy documents more particularly insurance policy (Freedom Life Plan Policy) bearing No. AFL2363957 with sum assured Rs.5,00,000/-. Risk commencement dated 20.3.2009 and date of maturity 20.3.2019 and annual premium was shown as Rs. 1 lac . The wife of the complainant namely Surinder Kaur and his sons namely Nanak Singh and Gurmukh Singh were made as nominees in the said policy, whereas the complainant was the policy holder. The complainant paid three annual premiums of Rs. 1 lac each in all Rs. 3 lacs to the opposite parties. In respect thereof separate receipts more particularly receipt dated 16.3.2009, 28.4.2010 and 9.5.2011 were issued by opposite party No.3. When the complainant received the policy documents, it came to the knowledge of the complainant that his correct mobile number was not mentioned in the policy while the actual mobile number of the complainant was 9988961190 whereas mobile number was shown to be 9888011457. The complainant requested the opposite party No.3 to add his correct mobile number in the policy document and opposite party No.3 apprised the complainant that wrong mobile number has been mentioned in the policy, have been corrected. Om the year 2011-2012 the complainant underwent an operation of his right leg which was not otherwise successful and the complainant was virtually bed ridden. Thereafter after getting some recovery from disease/ailment the complainant visited the opposite party No.3 to know about the current status of his policy and about Rs. 3 lacs paid by the complainant and the growth, if any thereon. The complainant was shocked to see that local office of opposite party No.3 was not there and they had already shifted their office to some other place without giving any notice to their customer and even they did not prefer to inform their customer afterwards regarding shifting of office. Now the complainant has located new premises of the local office of opposite party No.3 and he visited there to know about the current status of his policy , but the officials of local office of opposite party No.3 did not intimate the complainant the correct information on one pretext or the other. After a long persuasion on the part of the complainant, opposite party No.3 has disclosed the complainant that his policy has been terminated by the company i.e. opposite parties No.1 & 2 which otherwise is not correct and against the law and fact. Since the complainant has already paid three annual premium of Rs. 1 lac each respectively and thereafter no further premium was required to be paid by the complainant, therefore the policy could not have been cancelled. The complainant requested the opposite party No.3 either to revive his policy , if terminated or to refund Rs. 3 lacs alongwith all the benefit/growth amount available thereon. But opposite party No3 was not paying any heed to the genuine request of the complainant. The complainant has sought the following reliefs vide instant complaint:-
(i) Opposite parties be directed to either revive policy of the complainant or to refund Rs. 3 lacs alongwith all the benefit/growth amount available on it alongwith interest @ 12% p.a.;
(ii) Opposite parties be also directed to pay Rs. 1 lac to the complainant alongwith litigation expenses.
Hence, this complaint.
2. Despite due service, opposite parties No.1 to 3 did not appear to contest the claim and as such opposite parties No.1,2 & 3 were ordered to be proceeded against ex-parte.
3. In his bid to prove the case complainant has tendered into evidence his affidavits Ex.C-1 & Ex.C-2 alongwith documents Ex.C-3 to Ex.C-27 and closed the evidence .
4. We have heard the ld.counsel for the complainant and have carefully gone through the record on the file.
5. In order to prove the case, complainant has placed on record his affidavits Ex.C-1 and Ex.C-2, copy of policy Ex.C-3, copy of letter dated 24.3.2009 of opposite party regarding receiving of first premium Ex.C-4, copy of premium receipt dated 9.5.2011 Ex.C-5, copy of premium receipt Ex.C-6, copy of premium receipt dated 16.3.2009 Ex.C-7, copy of reply to legal notice dated 12.10.2015 written by Sh.Ankit Kalra, Adv.counsel for the opposite party Ex.C-8, copy of legal notice dated 17.8.2015 Ex.C-9. On the other hand opposite parties have not placed on record any evidence to rebut the case of the complainant as well as documents adduced by the complainant in support of his case. Altough at the initial stage, opposite parties appeared before this Forum but they rather willfully proceeded against ex-parte, without filing the written version even. The complainant has placed on record reply to the legal notice dated 12.10.2015 Ex.C-8 duly sent by the opposite party through counsel and also referred in para No.6 of the complainant wherein for the first time it was revealed that the policy of the complainant was terminated on 21.3.2014 and a cheque containing the surrender value amount of Rs. 1,36,859/- was sent to the complainant on 28.3.2014 as alleged. Thereafter a detailed reply cum legal notice dated 31.10.2015 , copy whereof is Ex. C-10was given by the complainant through counsel wherein all the allegations of the opposite parties were specifically denied by the complainant and it was specifically mentioned that no regular and periodic communications as alleged were sent to the complainant’s address to keep him apprise of the policy status. It is also the case of the complainant that no alleged cheque containing the surrender value amount i.e. Rs. 1,36,859/- was either sent to the complainant nor the same has been received by the complainant. However, the opposite parties did not prefer to give any reply to reply cum legal notice dated 31.10.2015 of the complainant. Thus it becomes amply clear that no surrender value to the tune of Rs. 1,36,859/- has been received by the complainant by means of the cheque. There is also no evidence on record for reaching the conclusion that the alleged cheque of Rs. 1,36,859/- was actually got encashed by the complainant. In such circumstances there is no escape but from holding that no surrender value of the alleged premium payment(s) of the complainant , have been made by the opposite parties No.1,2 & 3. Opposite parties have willfully suffered ex-parte despite due service and as such they impliedly admitted the case of the complainant. Even if the policy in dispute has been terminated , the complainant was entitled to receive the surrender value thereof as per rules.
6. Consequently, instant complaint succeeds ex-parte and the opposite parties are directed to refund the surrender value of the Insurance policy after deduction of stamp charges, medical charges, if any, and the mortality charges for the period the policy remained inforce . Opposite parties have been proved to be deficient in service, therefore, they are also directed to pay Rs. 5000/- as compensation while Rs. 2000/- are assessed as litigation expenses. Order shall be complied within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order ; failing which awarded amount shall carry interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of passing of order until full and final recovery. Case could not be disposed of within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of the cases in this Forum.Copies of the orders be furnished to the parties free of costs. File is ordered to be consigned to the record room.
Announced in Open Forum
Dated : 5.7.2016
/R/ ( S.S.Panesar )
President
( Kulwant Kaur Bajwa) (Anoop Sharma)
Member Member
