MR. PRABODHA KUMAR DASH, PRESIDENT:-           

                    This C.C.Case No. 64/2018 taken up today for order. The present case has been pending since dt. 26.11.2018 & today is 1^st August 2022. As it reveals from case record, this case has been posted to 58 dates, which is against the mandate prescribed under the C.P.Act-2019. This case should be disposed off as time bound manner, therefore, we are disposing it on priority basis.

Brief Fact:-

                     The Complainant was purchased Jeevan Sarala (with profits) policy as insured under the LIC as insurer for ten years term from dt. 24.11.2018 to maturity date 24.11.2028 with quarterly installment Rs. 3062/-. The policy bond prescribed sum assured Rs. 39,710/- & death benefit sum assured is Rs. 2,50,000/- that is 250 times of monthly installments. Grievances of complainant (insured) who purchased the policy as per the pamphlet, where it was specifically mentioned whoever deposit Rs.1000/- per months for ten years then entitled to Rs. 2,12,904/- as maturity value, basing upon the promises of agent as well as LIC he deposited all installments to a tune Rs. 1,22,480/- at the age of 59 for ten years, but at maturity the LIC paid him only Rs. 50,660/-, where under the insured faced financial loss because of the false promises made by LIC & his agent. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with such illegal, arbitrary action the insured appeared for various relief under the C.P.Act,2019. Having heard both the sides & after carefully scrutinising the record of present case, we find that the following issues would arise for consideration of this Commission:-

1. Whether the Complainant is a consumer as per C.P.Act-2019?
2. Whether the complaint petition has been filed within the prescribed limitation period?
3. Whether Ops are liable for deficiency in service & so also for Unfair Trade Practice?
4. Whether the Complainant aggrieved by the action of the LIC paid maturity value less than 70% of the total premium paid Rs. 1,22,480/-?
5. Whether the Complainant is entitle to various reliefs as prayed for?
6. Whether this Commission is empowered to redress the grievances of complainant for deficiency in service & also for unfair trade practice committed by the Ops?

Issue No.1:-

                      The Complainant being an insured person under the LIC provided service to the insured. The insured(LIC) is the service provider (financial) within Section 2(7) of C.P.Act,2019. The Complainant has the locus standi to file this case before this Commission.

Issue No.2:-

                      Since maturity claim payment under the policy No. 587271404 on the life of Bhagaban Jena was assessed on dt. 24.11.2018 & the same received by the Complainant and C.C.Case filed on dt. 26.11.2018 is well within the prescribe period of limitation as per C.P.Act,2019.

Issue No.3:-

                      The Complainant purchased the policy by the promise made by Op No.1 as agent, Op No.2 as branch & Op No.3 as Divisional Office. Assessment made by the Ops are much less than the total premium paid and the grievances are not redressed properly. The same act of deliberate latches by the Ops are within the deficiency in service & so also unfair trade practice by the Ops.

Issue No.4:-

                      The pamphlet on which the Complainant purchased the policy from Op No.1 & 2 wherein and where under it was prescribed that, on deposit of Rs. 1000/- per month as installments for 10 years the Complainant entitled to Rs. 2,12,904/- as the said pamphlet exhibited by the Complainant with other condition such as age limit, auto cover, loyalty addition, partial withdrawal, double accident benefit. The said pamphlet prescribed column wise installment and so also maturity value for different years.But no where there was a distinction between sum assured and death benefit sum assured. The LIC kept secret the fact when the agent & the authority collected the proposal form from a layman who has no mental faculty to understood the financial calculation involved in the scheme. The Op No.1 & 2 issued the policy bond subsequently which was not well understood by the false promises made by the Ops.

                          This policy bond prescribed two maturity value. Guaranted death benefit & maturity benefit. The death benefit is 250 times of monthly premium alongwith loyalty addition. Maturity benefit is equal to maturity sum assured plus loyalty addition. Loyalty addition depends on the profit of the LIC business. It is only admissible when the Policy continued for 10 years. The death benefit is same irrespective of age of the insured. But it is different on maturity when the age varies. It is profitable for the age group of 18 t0 49 and loss making policy for age group 50 to 60 because of high risk of Life called mortality. It is the only policy where maturity sum assured inversely proportional to the age. As age at entry increased the maturity sum assured comes down. So this plan becomes more attractive to lower age group in an investment angle of view. The higher age group only benefit only life risk factor but no such benefit for investment.

Issue No.5:-

                      As we gone through the policy bond & payment acknowledgment letter to the Complainant, the Complainant paid installment for ten years total Rs. 1,22,480/- and the intimation letter on maturity  to the Complainant provided gross amount of Rs. 53,807/- deducted Rs. 3,147/- the net amount payable is Rs. 50,660/- which is less than 70% of the installments paid which was unknown to the Complainant at the time of entering into proposal of the Ops and the same has been accepted badly. The Complainant further alleged the refund of total premium amount paid (investment alongwith sum returned). Instead of profit investment cum life risk the policy returned negative value of the invested amount. Money life has received several complaints from Jeevan Saral policy holder who completed 10 years term at maturity inflicts a loss of 50 to 70% for loss of investment. Jeevan Sarala was sold without informing the insured that, the maturity amount will be far low than the total premium amount.

                     In the recent judgement of the High court of Kerala at Ernakulam in a decided case LIC of India vs Belquis Banu Salim on 29^th January,2021 in WP(C ) No. 14855 of 2018 & 25559 of 2019,wherein Honbl’e High court confirmed the order passed in favour of the Complainant(insured) the award made by the PLA, Kozhikodi where the PLA directed the LIC to pay the death benefit maturity sum assured or to refund the entire premium paid together with compounded interest @12% P.A. So also the same in favour of Dr. Heera Banu, Wherein & where under Honbl’e Justice of Kerala High court at Ernakulam confirmed the order of PLA, Kozhikodi & granted relief in favour of policy holder.

                    Taking into consideration of the facts & circumstances involved in this case & the decision of High court of Kerala at Ernakulam in WP(C)No. 14885 of 2018& 25559 of 2019 which is squarely applicable to the facts & circumstances in the case in hand and the Complainant is entitled to the relief claimed made in the prayer. This Commission think it just and proper to exercise its jurisdiction vested in the C.P.Act,2019 to grant the relief so claimed for the interest of justice.

                                                           O R D E R

                      It is directed that, the Op No. 2&3 shall pay the total premium amount of Rs. 1,22,480/- to the Complainant with compoundable interest @ 9% P.A. from the date of maturity till its realization within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order. The complaint petition is allowed and no order as to cost.

                             Issue extract of the order to the parties for compliance.           

                        Pronounced in the open Court, this the 1^st day of August,2022.             

                              I, agree.

                                 Sd/-                                        Sd/-

                           MEMBER                             PRESIDENT

Documents Exihibited:-

1. Xerox copy of LIC Bond (Jiban Saral) of Sri Bhagaban Jena.
2. Xerox copy of  Pamphlet of LIC (Table No. 165).
3. Xerox copy of payment calculation sheet by the Op.