Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/948/2019

Sh Nand Lal - Complainant(s)

Versus

Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Company Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

In Person

01 Jan 2020

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

Consumer Complaint No.	:	948/2019
Date of Institution	:	17.09.2019
Date of Decision	:	01.01.2020

 

                                       

                       

 

Sh.Nand Lal s/o Moti Ram, Village Karoran, Nayagaon, District Mohali.

                                ...  Complainant

Versus

Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Co. Lt.d, Fourth Floor, SCO No.215-217, Sector 34, Chandigarh through its Manager.

…. Opposite Party

 

BEFORE:
	SHRI RAJAN DEWAN,	PRESIDENT
	SMT.PRITI MALHOTRA,	MEMBER

 

Argued by:
	Complainant in person.
	OP exparte

 

PER RAJAN DEWAN, PRESIDENT

1.         Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that the agent of the OP allured him that if he deposits Rs.5,000/- per year with the OP-Company for three years, he was to be paid Rs.50,000/- after 10 years and so he deposited  a sum of Rs.15,000/-  (Rs.5,000/- each) with the OP on different occasions vide receipts attached with the complaint  with a hope to get Rs.50,000/-.   According to the complainant, when he contacted the OP on payment of Rs.15,000/- he was told that the policy is no more in existence due to one installment of premium paid.  It has further been averred that if the policy was dead how another two premiums were taken against the policy.  It has further been averred that on payment of Rs.15,000/- he was informed that the policy was lapsed one year ago.  Alleging that the aforesaid acts amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Parties, the complainant has filed the instant complaint.
2.         Despite due service through registered post, the OP failed to put in appearance and as a result thereof it was ordered to be proceeded against exparte vide order dated 13.12.2019.
3.         We have heard the complainant in person and have gone through the documents on record.
4.         During the course of arguments, the complainant has submitted that the OP had returned a sum of Rs.5,346/- to him.
5.         From the documents placed on record, it is evident that the complainant was issued Bajaj Allianz Family Assure, Non-Participating Unit Linked Policy No.012213920 for sum assured of Rs.50,000/- on annual premium of Rs.5,000/-. The said policy was for a term of 20 years commencing from 05.03.2009 and the date of maturity was 05.03.2029 and the frequency of payment was annual. The complainant had paid Rs.15,000/- i.e. Rs.5,000/- each on three occasions with the OP as is evident from the premium receipts attached with the complaint. The grouse of the complainant is that on depositing Rs.15,000/-, he approached the OP to pay Rs.50,000/- but he was informed that the policy had lapsed one year ago. However, during the pendency of the present complaint a sum of Rs.5,346/- have been credited to his account.  
6.         To our mind, the case of the complainant is squarely covered under clause 7 of the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (Treatment of Discontinued Linked Insurance Policies) Regulations, 2010 which is reproduced as under :-

“Obligations of an insurer upon discontinuance of a policy

7.         The obligations of the insurer in this regard shall be as follows:-

i.          To impose discontinuance charges only to recoup expenses incurred towards procurement, administration of the policy and  incidental thereto.

ii.         To design the discontinuance charges to encourage the policyholder to continue with the contract for the full term;

iii.        To ensure that the discontinuance charges reflect the actual expenses incurred.

iv.        To structure the discontinuance charges within the statutory ceilings on commissions and expenses and

5. To ensure that the charges levied on the date of discontinuance (as a percentage of one annualized premium) do not exceed the limits specified below:-

 

Where the policy is discontinued during the policy year.	Maximum Discontinuance charges for the policies having annualized premium up to Rs.25000/-	Maximum discontinuance charges for the policies having annualized premium above Rs.25000/-
1	Lower of 20% (AP or FV) subject to a maximum of Rs.3000.	Lower of 6% (AP or FV) subject to maximum of Rs.6000/-
2	Lower of 15% (AP or FV) subject to a maximum of Rs.2000.	Lower of 4% of (AP or FV) subject to maximum of Rs.5000/-
3	Lower of 10% (AP or FV) subject to a maximum of Rs.1500.	Lower of 3% (AP or FV) subject to maximum of Rs.4000/-
4	Lower of 5% (AP or FV) subject to a maximum of Rs.1000.	Lower of 2% (AP or FV) subject to maximum of Rs.2000.
5 and onwards	NIL	NIL

 

 AP - Annualised premium

FV- fund value on the date of discontinuance

Provided that where a policy is discontinued, only discontinuance charge may be levied by the insurer, and no other charges by whatsoever name called shall be levied.

Provided that no discontinuance charges shall be imposed on single premium policies and on top ups.”

                   Thus, from the perusal of Regulation 7, extracted above, it is crystal clear that the opposite Party, could have at the most deducted an amount of Rs.1,000/- from this policy and refunded the remaining amount to the complainant at its own.  However, the OP have refunded a sum of Rs.5,346/- to the complainant and that too after the filing of the instant complaint.   In such circumstances, the act of the OP has committed deficiency in service by refunding Rs.5,346/-  contrary to the guidelines of the IRDA mentioned above.  Hence, the opposite party is found deficient in rendering proper service to the complainant.  Therefore, in the given situation, the present complaint deserves to succeed and the same is allowed against the opposite party.

7.           In view of the above discussion, the present complaint is allowed and the opposite party is  directed as under :-
   1. To pay the amount of Rs.15,000-1000 = Rs.14,000/- as per Regulation 7, extracted above, less the amount of Rs.5,346/- already paid ;
   2. To pay Rs.2,500/- as compensation for mental agony and harassment.
8.         This order be complied with by the opposite party, within 45 days from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which the amounts mentioned in para 7 above shall carry interest @9 % per annum from the date of this order till actual payment.
9.         Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

 

Announced 01/01/2020	Sd/-
	(RAJAN DEWAN) PRESIDENT
	Sd/-
	(PRITI MALHOTRA) MEMBER