Date of Filing:28-07-2016
Date of Order:09 -10-2019
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM – I, HYDERABAD
P r e s e n t
HON’BLE Sri P.VIJENDER, B.Sc. L.L.B. PRESIDENT
HON’BLE Smt. D.NIRMALA, B.Com., LLB., MEMBER
Wednesday, the 9th day of October, 2019
C.C.No.370 /2016
Between
P.V.Reddy S/o.Late P.S.N.Reddy,
57 years, R/o.23/C, Srilaxmi Nilayam
Apartments, 3rd floor, Addagutta Society,
Kukatpally, Hyderabad – 500085
(Mobile No.9177178640) ……Complainant
And
- Baja Allianz General Insuracne Co.Ltd.,
North East Plaza, 4th floor, Beside BMW Showroom
Opposite RTA Office, Erramanjil X Road,
Hyderabad – 500082
(Ph No.040-33122800, Fax: 040-33122801)……. opposite party No.1
- Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Co.Ltd.,
North East Plaza, 3rd floor, Beside BMW Showroom
Opposite RTA Office, Erramanjil X Road,
Hyderabad – 500082 ………… opposite party No.2
(In view of the order passed in I.A 188/2017 dated 31-10-2017, amendment is carried out by addressing the necessary party at Sl.No. 2 as opposite party No.2. Therefore, opposite party No.1 at Sl.No.1 is not necessary party and no notice is required to opposite party No.1)
Counsel for the complainant : Sri K. Ram Murthy
Counsel for the opposite Party No.1 : Sri S.Promod Kumar
opposite party No.2 : Sri G.Anand Kumar
O R D E R
(By Sri P. Vijender, B.Sc., LL.B., President on behalf of the bench)
This complaint has been preferred under Section 12 of C.P. Act 1986 alleging that non –payment of surrender value of the policy amounts to deficiency of service hence, a direction to the opposite parties to pay the surrender value with interest and to award compensation for causing mental agony and physical stress on account of nonpayment of the same.
- The complaint averments in brief are that the complainant obtained Group insurance policy known as Suraksha policy from opposite party No.2 and the premium of Rs.61,000/- is payable at one time. The complainant availed loan of Rs.61,000/- from opposite party No.1 to pay the one time premium to opposite party No.2. The said loan was repayable to opposite party No.1 with interest at 12.99% by way of 12 monthly equal installments of Rs.5,449/- each commencing from 5th August 2010 to till 5th July 2011.
The coverage of the insurance started from 24-6-2010 for a period of 10 years, sum assured was INR5,17,631/-. As per the terms of the policy, the policy can be surrendered after three years and 70% surrender value is payable immediately on early surrender. Accordingly complainant after completion of three years submitted an application for surrender of the policy on 01-08-2013 to Bajaj Allianz Pune through Bajaj office at Somajiguda. Thereafter he made rounds to the office reminding opposite party No.2 about his request to surrender the policy. He was asked to submit cancelled cheque so the amount would be credited to his account. On 25-5-2015 he submitted cancelled cheque with surrender letter and in spite of it the amount was not credited to his account. It is almost three years since he filed application for surrender of the policy and in spite of it action was not taken. On 19-3-2016 complainant again approached opposite party No.1 and met an employee namely Mohd Goush who informed him that they were making correspondence with the Head office. Thereafter he received a mail stating that as per Bajaj policy and as per SOP they were unable to surrender customer basic policy and therefore case is closed . The complainant sent a mail on 19th March 2016 for payment of the surrender value. No reply was received. Hence he again sent a letter to opposite party No.2 on 9-4-2016 and it was also not responded. Hence the present complaint.
- Opposite party No.1 in the written version stated that Group Suraksha policy was issued by Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Company and by not Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd. The entire document’s of correspondence by the complainant is with Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Company Ltd and not by the opposite party No.1. Thus opposite party No.1 is not a necessary party, and cause of action against opposite party No.1 for the complainant. Hence complaint against opposite party No.1 is liable to be dismissed.
- Opposite party No.2 filed a detailed written version admitting issuance of Suraksha policy to complainant but denied the allegation of deficiency of service. The entire complaint revolves around complainant not being able to surrender the policy which in fact is not routed properly by the complainant himself. The complainant had every option to approach the branch office of any of the Bajaj Allianz Life insurance company for surrender the policy. Upon the receipt of the letter from the complainant with regard to surrender of policy he was clearly informed in the month of May 2016 that he will have to visit the nearest branch office of Bajaj Allianz Life insurance company and submit a certificate of insurance with consent letter for further action or he can courier required documents to Pune office but the complainant had not complied the same and he visited this Forum with the present complaint seeking compensation. Even now the complainant can surrender the policy at any of the branch office of opposite party and surrender value will be paid to him in terms and conditions . Thus there was no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party.2 hence complaint is liable to be dismissed.
In the enquiry the complainant has got filed his evidence affidavit which is nothing but reproducing of complaint averments. He got exhibited eight (8) documents which are not in dispute. Similarly for the Opposite Party No.2 evidence affidavit of Sri Y. Mallikarjuna stated to be Manager Operations at Hyderabad branch is got filed and the contents of the same are in line with the stand taken written version filed for it. Two (2) documents are exhibited for it which are not in dispute. Complainant and opposite party No.2 have filed written arguments .
On a consideration of material available on record the following points have emerged for consideration .
- Whether the complainant could be able to prove deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party No.2 ?
- Whether the complainant is entitled for the compensation ?
- To what relief?
Point No.1: As could be seen from the record the complainant has unnecessarily impleaded opposite party No.1 as opposite party No.1 has nothing to do with the policy. The so called deficiency of service is on the part of Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co.Ltd ie., opposite party No.1 which issued him the Group policy as known as Suraksha policy. The only connecting fact of both parties is to pay a onetime premium amount of Rs.61,000/- for obtaining subject Suraksha policy from opposite party No.2 he availed loan from opposite party No.1. So the loan transaction between the opposite party No.1 and complainant is different and distinct from the obtaining of Suraksha Group Insurance policy from opposite party No.2 by the complainant. Hence as rightly pointed by opposite party No.1 the complainant has misdirected the present complaint against the opposite party No.1 and having realized it the complainant got impleaded opposite party No.2 by way of petition I.A188/2017 and thereby got dismissed the complaint against the opposite party No.1 .
The securing of group insurance policy known as Suraksha after payment of onetime premium of Rs.61,000/- is not in dispute. The complainant stand is as per the terms and conditions of the policy the policy holder can surrender the policy after completion of three years and on such surrender the policy holder get 70% of the surrender value, hence soon after completion of 3 years period he submitted application on 1-8-2013 and it was addressed to Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Co.Ltd., Pune through Bajaj Alliance Life Insurance Co.Ltd., at Somajiguda and ever since has been moving around the office and making efforts to get the amount but there was no response.
The opposite party No.2 stand is the complainant was required to surrender the policy certificate along with a letter with reasons for surrender of the policy by approaching any of the branch office but instead the complainant without surrendering the policy certificate and without approaching any of the branch has come up with the present complaint. Despite this specific version of opposite party No.2 the complainant has not stated even in his evidence affidavit that he has approached any particular branch of opposite party No.2 insurance company along with policy certificate for surrendering it. As could be seen from the documents filed by the complainant he addressed letter under Ex.A3 to Bajaj Alliance Life Insurance Co.Ltd Pune. He has not filed any acknowledgment in proof of service or a postal receipt in proof of sending of this Ex.A3 letter to opposite party No.2 at Pune. In fact he has not referred surrendering of policy certificate along with this letter. Ex.A4 is letter addressed by the complainant to Bajaj Alliance Life Insurance Co.Ltd at Hyderabad on 25-5-2015. This Ex.A4 contains an endorsement of receiving of letter by concerned head in the branch of Bajaj Alliance Life Insurance Co.Ltd. at Hyderabad. After receipt of this letter the concerned at the branch office at Hyderabad has not addressed a letter to complainant or informed the complainant at the time of receiving of this letter asking him to submit the policy certificate. It is evident from Ex.A4 letter that the complainant also submitted a cancelled cheque so as to enable to opposite party No.2 remit the surrender value to his account. Despite receipt of the same the insurance company has not responded asking complainant to submit the policy certificate. Failure to specify the complainant to submit the policy certificate amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the insurance company i.e, opposite party No.2. Even after filing of this complaint the company ought to have asked the complainant to submit policy certificate so as to enable to it to pay the surrender value. Merely because complainant did not submit the policy certificate with a letter asking insurance company to pay the surrender value at the earlier does not mean that the insurance company refuse to pay the surrender value. Thus there is a deficiency of service on the part of the insurance company. Accordingly point is answered.
Point No.2: Since there is a deficiency of service on the part of insurance company it is liable to pay compensation of Rs.25,000/-. Accordingly point is answered.
Point No.3: In the result, the complaint is allowed in part directing the opposite party No.2 to pay the surrender value payable as on this date and further directed to pay a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards compensation and to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- towards cost of this complaint.
Time for compliance : 30 days from the date of service of this order
Dictated to steno, transcribed and typed by her, pronounced by us on this the 9th day of October , 2019
MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
Exs. filed on behalf of the Complainant:
Ex.A1- copy of Bajaj Finance personal loan & loan repayment schedules
Ex.A2- copy of certificate of insurance
Ex.A3- copy of application dated 1-8-2013
Ex.A4- copy of reminder application dated 25-5-2015 along with blank cancelled cheque addressed to the Manager, Bajaj Allianz Co.Ltd
Ex.A5-copy of hand written reply of Md. Goush, employee of opposite party
Ex.A6-copy of email dated 19-3-2016
Ex.A7- copy of reply email
Ex.A8 – letter dated 9-4-2016 addressed to opposite party
Exs. filed on behalf of the Opposite party
Ex.B1- Product circular of Bajaj Allianz Group Suraksha plan
Ex.B2- Certificate of Insurance policy issued by the Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Co.Ltd., bearing master policy No.0169079980 terms & conditions
MEMBER PRESIDENT
