BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM
VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
PRESENT
SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT
SMT. BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER
SMT. S.K.SREELA : MEMBER
C.C. No. 77/2010 Filed on 05.03.2010
Dated : 31.01.2011
Complainant:
Shankaran Ramaswamy Reddiar, S/o Ramaswamy Reddiar, Ram Appoy, T.C No. 37/1939(1), Shankhu Chakram Lane, Airport Road, Thiruvananthapuram-695 023.
(By adv. K. Sreekumaran Nair)
Opposite parties :
Aviva Life Insurance, Asirwad Towers, Plot No. 2, Old No. 182, III Floor, Kodambakkam High Road, Nugambakkam, Chennai- 600 034.
The Manager, Aviva Life Insurance Company India (P) Ltd., T.C 25/1655-11, III Floor, Rema Plaza, S.S. Kovil Road, Thampanoor, Thiruvananthapuram-1.
(By adv. Prasanna Kumar Nair)
This O.P having been heard on 31.12.2010, the Forum on 31.01.2011 delivered the following:
ORDER
SRI. G. SIVAPRASAD: PRESIDENT
This complaint has been filed by the complainant to direct opposite parties to pay the maturity value of Rs. 5,00,000/- vide 'Life Bond Plus' policy No. LPG 1360066 at the time of maturity on 20.12.2011 together with compensation and cost. Opposite parties filed version and insisted for hearing on the maintainability of the complaint. Heard both sides. The preliminary issue to be considered herein is whether the present complaint is maintainable as per the terms and conditions of the policy. Admittedly, complainant had taken an insurance policy called 'Life Bond Plus' vide policy No. LPG 1360066 from the opposite parties which would mature on 20.12.2011. It has been the case of the complainant that on 12.01.2010 he verified the product value of the policy which had come to Rs. 40,393/- which was due to high mortality charge, that opposite party had taken Rs. 20,000/- towards the average charge of mortality per year which is against all principles of law, equity and natural justice. The stand took by the opposite party is that as per terms and conditions of the policy the complainant is only entitled to Fund Value of the policy at the time of maturity of the policy, that charges deducted for policy management are very well mentioned in the terms and conditions of the policy contract, that complainant has availed the benefit of risk cover during the policy continuance and the opposite party has extended the benefit of sum assured to complainant for a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- in consideration of premium paid by the complainant towards the policy and on happening of any untoward happening, and that opposite party based on the outcome of the investigation would have paid all the benefits to the complainant which he was entitled under policy terms and conditions. It has been contended by the opposite party that the policy holder was never misguided by the representatives/agents of the opposite party in respect of the policy features and benefits. Opposite party has furnished the copy of the standard terms and conditions of the policy 'Life Bond Plus'. As per the terms and conditions of 'Life Bond Plus' the policy holder was provided Free Look Period. Accordingly, he has the right to review the policy terms and conditions and cancel his policy within 15 days from the date of receipt of the policy document. If he cancels his policy, the premium he has paid will be refunded after adjusting the adverse movement in unit prices less charges incurred on account of stamp duty. In this case commencement of policy was on 20 December, 2006. Though free look period was provided to the policy holder he had not used it to review the policy terms and conditions within 15 days from the date of receipt of the policy document, thereby both the parties are bound by the contents of the policy. It is to be noted that the policy would mature on 20.12.2011. If opposite party violated any of the provisions of the policy contract, which can be challenged by the complainant on the maturity of the said contract. Not being challenged the policy within the free look period provided, complainant herein challenged the efficacy of the policy during the course of its operation, contrary to the provisions of the contract. In this regard, it would be apposite to make a reference to the policy. The policy 'Life Bond Plus' is a unit linked, single premium endowment plan, designed to provide the policy holder the maximum benefits of investment, returns and tax benefits. It is further to be noted that in a market based policy, fund management would depend entirely upon the market fluctuation that the performance of the Fund invested in the market would never be in the hands of the opposite party. Further, such policy provides a combination of risk cover and investment, and the dynamics of the capital market have a direct bearing on the performance of the unit linked policy. In such a policy the investment risk in investment portfolio is borne by the policy holder. Depending upon the performance of the unit linked funds chosen, the policy holder may achieve gains or losses on his/her investments. In the case in hand, complainant has never preferred to surrender the policy, rather he prefers to continue the policy till its maturity on 20.12.2011. This is a complaint for directing opposite party to pay the maturity value. Policy has not yet matured. Complaint filed prior to maturity date without any cause of action. Any direction in this regard prior to maturity date will be highly immature, unreasonable, unjust, illogical and against the principles of natural justice. No cause of action arose to proceed the complaint as such. In view of the foregoing discussions and material available on record, we find complaint as such is not maintainable as policy has not yet matured and cause of action has not yet arisen. Complaint has no substance which deserves to be dismissed.
In the result, complaint is dismissed as not maintainable. Parties shall bear and suffer their costs.
A copy of this order as per the statutory requirements be forwarded to the parties free of charge and thereafter the file be consigned to the record room.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by her, corrected by me and pronounced in the Open Forum, this the 31st day of January 2011.
Sd/-
G. SIVAPRASAD : PRESIDENT
Sd/-
BEENAKUMARI. A : MEMBER
Sd/-
S.K. SREELA : MEMBER
