Haryana

Karnal

508/2012

Brij Bhushan Sharma S/o Mangla Nand Sharma - Complainant(s)

Versus

Aviva Life Insurance Company India Limited ., Aviva Life Insurance Company India Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Rajesh Mani

10 Oct 2014

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL.

 

                                                          Complaint No.508 of 2012

                                                               Date of instt:18.10.2012

                                                               Date of decision: 10.09.2015

 

 

Brij Bhushan Sharma son of Shri Mangla Nand Sharma resident of House No.53, Sector 14, Urban Estate, Karnal.

                                                             ……….Complainant.

                             Versus

 

1. Aviva Life Insurance Company India Limited, Sector 12, Urban Estate, Karnal through its Divisional Manager.

 

2. Aviva Life Insurance Company India Limited, Aviva Tower, Sector Road, Opposite Gulf Course, DLF Phase, V, Sector – 43, Gurgaon, through its Managing Director.

                                                           ……… Opposite parties.

 

                    Complaint U/s  12  of the Consumer

                     Protection Act.

 

Before          Sh.K.C.Sharma……. President.

                   Sh.Anil Sharma ………Member.

                   Smt.Shashi Sharma…..Member.   

         

 

 Present:       Sh.Rajesh Mani Advocate for the complainant.

                   Sh.Vineet Rathore Advocate for the Ops.

                  

ORDER:

 

                        This complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, on the averments that he purchased policy  under the plan “Aviva Sachin Century Plan” bearing No. SCG2279052 – Client ID 2358103 dated 9.1.2009 from the Opposite Parties ( in short OPs). The term of the said policy was ten years and he was to  pay premium of Rs.25,000/- per annum. He paid the first installment of Rs.25,000/- on 7.1.2009. However, due to some unavoidable circumstances,  he  was unable to pay further premiums.  He informed the Ops in that regard and they told that if he wanted to get back his money deposited by him, he would get only Rs.16000/- approximately and if he would take money after a period of three years, he would get the entire amount of Rs.25000/- deposited by him.  Accordingly, he agreed to take the money after three years. After a period of three years, he contacted the Ops and they assured him that Rs.25000/- would be sent to him but a cheque of Rs.836/- dated 11.1.2012 alongwith letter dated  13.1.2012 was sent by the OPs as surrender value of the policy. He was shocked to receive the said cheque and contacted the Ops and requested them to pay his entire amount. The OP no.1 assured that his case was under process with the Head office and advised him to get encashed the said cheque and  rest of the balance amount  would be sent to him lateron. Thereafter, he visited the office of Ops time and again, but the OPs postponed the matter on one pretext or the other. Thus, there was deficiency in service on the part of the OPs due to which he suffered mental agony and pain apart from financial loss.

 

2.                Notice of the complaint was given to the Ops, they appeared and filed written statement controverting the claim of the complainant. Objections have been raised that complainant has concealed the material facts; that the complaint is factually and legally misconceived , therefore, not maintainable; that the complainant has not disclosed any cause of action to proceed against the Ops; that the complaint is vexatious and malafide; that the complaint is time barred and that this Forum has no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the present complaint.

 

                   On merits, it has been submitted that complainant approached the Ops  for issuance of the insurance policy and proposal dated 22.10.2008 was received in the office of Ops, which was duly filled and signed by the complainant after going through “ keys features”  documents. The first premium of Rs.25000/- was  also received by the OPs alongwith proposal form. The policy was to commence  from 7.1.2009, sum assured was Rs.2,50,000/ and the annual premium was Rs.25,000/-. Policy documents were dispatched to the complainant on 13.1.2009, vide over night courier docket No.502120061  and delivered on 13.1.2009. The complainant did not  pay the second installment as  required under the policy.  Therefore, policy lapsed on 12.02.2010 and no revival letter was received from the policy holder.  Thereafter, after calculating the charges and deduction as per the terms and conditions of the policy, an amount of Rs.836/- as surrender value was paid to the complainant by way of a cheque which was accepted by him as full and final payment of the said policy. Thus, nothing remained due towards Ops, therefore, the complaint is liable to be dismissed. The other allegations made in the complaint have been specifically denied.

 

3.                In evidence of complainant, he tendered his affidavit Ex.C1  alongwith documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C6.

 

4.                On the other hand, in evidence of Ops, affidavit of Sh. Watan Kumar Bhajanka, Senior Executive Legal, Ex.OP1/A and documents Ex.OI  to Ex.OPJ have been tendered.

 

5.                We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file very carefully.

 

6.                The complainant purchased policy under the plan  “Aviva Sachin Century Plan” bearing No. SCG2279052 – Client ID 2358103 dated 9.1.2009 from the Opposite Parties for a period of ten years and he was to pay premium of Rs.25,000/- per year. He deposited the first premium of Rs.25,000/- on 7.1.2009. The policy was to commence on 28.1.2009. After the first installment he did not pay  paid no premium and after three years approached the Ops for refund of his amount deposited by him but the OPs sent  him cheque  of Rs.836/-  dated 11.1.2012 as surrender  value of the policy.  The complainant has claimed the balance amount of Rs.24164/- from the Ops out of the amount of Rs.25000/- deposited by him as first installment.

 

7.                 The learned counsel for the complainant contended that he was told by the OPs that after three years, he  would get the entire amount of Rs.25000/- deposited by him and only for that reason he waited for a period of three years. It has further been argued that the complainant was not given any notice after nonpayment of the second and third premiums  for his policy  and he was given only  surrender value of Rs.836/-, therefore, he is entitled to get the remaining amount of Rs.24164/-.

 

8.                          The learned counsel for the Ops contended that proposal form was filled up and signed by the complainant after going through the key features .  The complainant was unable to pay the  second and third premiums and asked for surrendering the policy, therefore, he was paid amount of Rs.836/- as surrender value of the policy as per the terms and conditions of the policy. Thus, there was no deficiency in services on the part of the Ops.

 

9.                          The copy of the “Aviva Sachin Centaury Plan” Ex.OP1/B shows that print/font  size of the document is  too small that it is very difficult to read the same by an ordinary person with naked eyes. The Ops have not produced any copy of the terms and conditions of the policy, which was signed by the complainant. The copy of the proposal formEx.OP1/C shows that the same was signed by the complainant under declaration in para no.8 but the declaration under para no.10 was not signed. Declaration under para no.10 was signed only by the adviser whereas the same was also required to be signed by the declarant.   The Adviser has not been produced by the Ops as their witness. Name of the declarant who had explained the contents of the proposal form to the complainant has not been disclosed either in the proposal form or in the written statement filed by the Ops. Therefore, the plea of the Ops that complainant was read over and explained the terms and conditions of the policy and he had put his signatures thereon after understanding the contents thereof  is not established. The complainant had paid only one premium and he was unable to deposit the next premium. Had he not been advised to wait for a period of three years  in order to get refund of the amount of his premium, he would have certainly applied for surrendering the policy when he was unable to pay the next premium. The fact that he approached the Ops after three years of the purchasing the policy, indicates that he was advised to  do so by the officials of the OPs.

 

10.                        Admittedly a cheque  of Rs.836/-  dated 11.1.2012 was issued in favour of the complainant and the same was sent to him alongwith letter dated 13.1.2012.It is pertinent to note that no notice  regarding lapse of the policy or explaining the surrender  value of the policy was ever sent to the complainant. Notice was required to be issued to him when he did not deposit the next premium. However, it is quite surprising that a notice for depositing the next premium due on 7.1.2010 was issued on 9.11.2012, as is evident from Ex.OP/J. There could be no question of issuing such notice to the complainant, when he was already  paid surrender  value of the policy on 13.1.2012,  Issuance of such notice tends to show that Ops tried to  cover up their case of not issuing notice to the complainant regarding non depositing the next premium which was due on 7.1.2010.Issuance of notice after such a long period smacks foul play on the part of Ops.  Under such circumstances,  the plea raised by the complainant which find support from his affidavit  that he was assured that he would get refund  of premium amount of Rs.25000/- deposited by him on 7.1.2009 after expiry of three years.  Thus, there was deficiency in services on the part of the Ops.

 

11.                        As a sequel to the foregoing reasons, we accept the present complaint and direct the Ops to make the payment of Rs.24164/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the present complaint i.e. 18.10.2012 till its actual realization. The complainant shall also be entitled for a sum of Rs.5500/- for the mental harassment caused to him and  the litigation expenses. The Ops shall make the compliance of this order within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

 

Announced
dated:10.09.2015                                                                            

                                                                 (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                   President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

 (Anil Sharma)       (Smt.Shashi Sharma)    

   Member.                             Member.

 

 

 

Present:        Sh.Rajesh Mani Advocate for the complainant.

                   Sh.Vineet Rathore Advocate for the Ops.

 

                   Arguments in part heard. For remaining arguments, the case is adjourned to 10.9.2015.

 

Announced
dated: 20.08.2015                                                                           

                                                                    (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                   President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

 (Anil Sharma)       (Smt.Shashi Sharma)    

   Member.                             Member.

 

Present:        Sh.Rajesh Mani Advocate for the complainant.

                   Sh.Vineet Rathore Advocate for the Ops.

 

                   Remaining arguments heard. Vide our separate order of the even date, the present complaint has been accepted. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

 

Announced
dated:10.09.2015                                                                            

                                                                    (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                   President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

 (Anil Sharma)       (Smt.Shashi Sharma)    

   Member.                             Member.