Delhi

East Delhi

CC/110/2015

YOGENDER - Complainant(s)

Versus

BIRLA SUN LIFE INS - Opp.Party(s)

19 Feb 2018

ORDER

               DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL FORUM EAST Govt of NCT Delhi

              CONVENIENT SHOPPING CENTRE, 1^st FLOOR, SAINI ENCLAVE, DELHI 110092  

 

                                                                                                   Consumer complaint no.        110/2015

                                                                                                   Date of Institution                19/02/2015

                                                                                                   Order reserved on                19/02/2018                                                                                                   

                                                                                                   Date of Order                         21/02/2018

                                                                                      

In matter of

Mr. Yogendra Pal, adult   

s/o- Sh Duli Chand

R/o – 101/1, Circular Road, Shahdara Delhi 110032………..…………….Complainant                                                                   

                                                                               

                                                                  Vs

1-The Manager, Birla Sun Life Insurance Co. Ltd.  

5^th & 6^th Floor, G. Corp., Tech Park

Ghodbunder Road, Nr Kasar Wadavali PS

Thane (W), 400601

 

2- The Branch Manager, Birla Sun Life Insurance Co. Ltd.  

Plot no. 4, 2^nd Floor, Community Centre

Aditya Arcade, Karkarduma, Delhi 110092

 

Mr Brij Pal Singh, Agent (code-GA-1123)

Birla Sun Life Insurance Co. Ltd.  

Plot no. 4, 2^nd Floor, Community Centre

Aditya Arcade, Karkarduma, Delhi 110092 …………………….………………Opponents

 

Complainant’s Advocate - Mr Devendra Kumar

Opponent’s Advocate -     Mr  Deepak Sabarwal & Asso.   

  

 

Quorum                                 Sh Sukhdev  Singh       President

                                                Dr P N Tiwari                 Member

                                                Mrs Harpret Kaur         Member

 

Order by Dr P N Tiwari, Member

Brief Facts of the case

Complainant convinced by the agent of OP1 (Mr. Brij Pal Singh, code GA 1123) for a life insurance policy of OP1 explaining various benefits so, complainant paid a sum of Rs 2500/-in cash as initial payment vide Application no. A10438710 and receipt no. 3939223 (Ex CW1/1/) dated 13/05/2008 having monthly premium of Rs 1149.92 paise for a sum of Rs one lac as sum assured vide policy no. 001714824 in the month of May, 2008 and paid monthly installment up to Dec. 2008, thus paid Rs 11,249.28-regularly.

 It was stated that OP2 issued another policy in his name vide policy no. 002185532 after closing previous policy (no. 002185532) without his consent and signatures, filling policy proposal form or getting examined. OP2 deducted a sum of Rs 58,700.76/- till July 2012. It was stated by complainant that he paid the said amount, but was shocked to know through telephonically from OP1 that his first policy was lapsed and had to pay a sum of Rs 6234/- as additional charges to revive the policy, so complainant paid the same amount on 23/09/2009 vide receipt no. 13431383 and paid monthly premium of Rs 1333.36/- through ECS thus paid a total amount Rs 76.184.04/-(Ex CW1/2a to f).

It was stated that OP1 never informed about the Unit Linked Plan having 3 years locking period and would get sum assured amount, so wrote letter to OP1 on 02/09/2011 for knowing the status of his first policy (Ex CW1/1A) and again on 20/11/2014 (Ex CW1/1B) and also lodged complaint on grievance cell at grievancebirlasunlife.com. When no reply was received from OP, filed this complaint and claimed refund of Rs 76,184.04/-with 24% interest and compensation Rs two lacs for physical and mental harassment and Rs 35,000/- as litigation charges.

OP submitted joint written statement and denied all the facts and allegations in the complaint. It was stated that the complaint be dismissed at the initial stage as complainant violated policy terms and conditions. It was also stated that complainant did not opt the benefit of “Free Look Period” provided by the OP as per IRDA guidelines and contract was violated in reference of Suraj Mal Ram Niwas Oil Mills (P) Ltd vs UIIC 2010, 10 (SC 567) and Reliance Life Insurance Co. Ltd vs Madhavcharya in RP 211 of 2009.  

It was submitted that policy no. 001714824 was terminated on 14/06/2012 after repeated reminders sent by OP1 (OPW1/2) due to nonpayment of number of his monthly premium which was opted by the complainant. He had to pay premiums of Rs 1249.92/-per month through ECS, but in July 2008, ECS was denied by the complainant’s bank vide account no. 110028032 under “Insufficient Fund” which was intimated to pay the lapsed premium through cheque at any of OP’s branch within 30 days (Ex OPW1/3) and if failed to do so, policy would be terminated. So, complainant did not pay lapsed premium for the first policy and so policy no. 001714824 was terminated.

OP1 submitted that complainant approached for a new policy for which all the process was adopted as per IRDA guidelines and he filled policy proposal form/ application vide no. 17304942 for Birla Sun Life dream Plan through insurance advisor/agent code no. GA 1054. The policy was issued wef 05/11/2008 vide policy no. 2185532 (Ex OPW1/4) with all terms and conditions. He opted quarterly mode of premium payment of Rs 2700/-for 20 years through ECS mode. The said policy was opted for ‘Risk and Savings’ and thereafter policy was issued putting his signatures on ‘Declaration’. Proper KYC address proof and ID was taken (Ex OPW1/6).

It was stated that complainant was an educated person working as Computer operator in Delhi High Court and had read over all the contents of policy proposal form (Ex OPW1/1) and was getting salary of Rs 2.2 lacs and had over 10 years of service, so it could not be said that he did not understand free look period and related all the benefits of the policy like survival benefits and death benefits. All the contents of the application form vide no 17304942 had put his signatures on each paper containing details benefits in future.

Further submitted that complainant had deposited only Rs 2500/-on 25/May/2008 under Premium Paid Certificate in policy no. 001714824. Under policy no. 002185532 which was issued from 10/12/2008, complainant had deposited a sum of Rs 59,601.68 paise till 10/07/2012. All his payments were received irregularly and thereafter he did not pay any payment and policy too was terminated (Ex OPW1/7 & 7A). Hence, there was no deficiency in the services of OPs, so prayed for dismissal of complaint.   

Complainant filed his rejoinder to the written statement and denied all the replies submitted OP1 and stated that OP1 had cancelled his first policy without his notice or consent. He had also submitted his evidences as first premium deposition receipt of Rs 2500/-as cash on dated 13/05/2008 (Ex.CW1/1), his UCO bank, Karkarduma Court pass book saving account no. 90100100001680 (Ex CW1/2, 2A, to 2F) showing withdrawal of ECS monthly. Hence, OP terminated his first policy and issued a new policy without his knowledge and consent.  

OP1 submitted their evidences on affidavit through Md. Akruti Minocha, working as deputy Manager, Legal with OP1 and reaffirmed on oath that their rejection of first policy vide no. 001714824 was justified on the terms and conditions as complainant did not pay his monthly premium regularly despite of repeated reminders to him where clear intimation was sent for nonpayment due to ECS failure under “Insufficient Fund” under saving account no. 110028032/SB20006694210 and second reminder on dated 25/08/2008 (Ex OPW1/7 & 7A) with all terms and conditions, third reminder on dated 14/06/2012 so his policy was terminated.   

It was submitted that complainant again approached for a new getting a policy on dated 05/11/2008 vide new policy proposal form was filled by him (Ex OPW1/4) under Birla Sun Life Dream Plan and opted monthly premium and was issued new policy vide no. 002185532 wef 10/12/2008 for a monthly premium Rs 1333.36/- where he paid irregularly up to 10/07/2012 as per OP1 premium payment sheet (Ex OPW1/7 & 7A). As complainant did not comply the terms and conditions of policy no. 002185532, so this policy was also terminated based on clear laws laid down in various citations as Mithool Nayak vs LIC, AIR 1962 SC, Suraj Mal Ram Niwas Oil Mills 2010/10 SC/ 567, Harish Kumar Chaddha vs Bajaj Allianz life insurance Co., 201, 188 NC. So, their all the evidences were on record and correct as per policy conditions.

 

Heard arguments from both party’s Ld. Counsels and after perusal of file, order was served.

 

After analyzing all the facts and evidences of both the parties, it was observed that under first policy vide policy no. 001714824, complainant deposited only initial amount of Rs 2500/- and thereafter no monthly installment of premium was deposited. Complainant had not submitted any evidence of ECS for first policy or policy documents. The said first policy was terminated due to failure to comply the reminders by OP1.

As far as second policy no. 002185532 was concerned, it was a quarterly mode of payment through ECS which too was not paid. The second policy was of 20 years tenure that means up to 2028.

We have noted during arguments of complainant that Fraud was done by OP by not taking signatures on any papers and terminated first policy without his knowledge and consent. In addition to this, second policy was started in Dec. 2008 and No Free Look period option was given where his premium was paid through ECS regularly under Dream Plan policy.

By scrutinizing all such allegations in the case, we have found all his allegations were wrong and has put all his contentions wrongly before Forum for availing wrongful gains illegally. There was no evidence of ECS payment or bank details on record for getting his first policy and nonpayment of monthly premium despite of reminders from OP, the termination was justified as per policy terms and condition. As far as second policy under same plan is concerned, here also he was defaulter in payments, but he paid some installments as per his evidences and admission by OP. So all his allegations during arguments were wrong and wasted Forum’s time and his complaint deserves dismissal with heavy cost, but in the interest of natural justice, we pass the following directions as under—

1. Complainant is directed to pay all due premium installments as per terms and conditions of the said second policy from August 2012 onward if he desires to continue second policy whose maturity is up to 2028.
2. OP shall not charge any penalty from the last due installment tenure and if complainant fails to comply the directions under the order, OP may proceed according to the terms and conditions.  
3. There shall be no order to cost or any award.

The order copy be sent to the parties as per the Regulation 18 of the Consumer Protection Regulations, 2005 (in short the CPR) and file be consigned to the Record Room under Regulation 20(1) of the CPR.  

 

 (Dr) P N Tiwari  Member                                                               Mrs Harpreet Kaur, Member                       

 

                                                         Sukhdev Singh  President