DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH

========

Krishan Lal Miglani, R/o #1570, Sector 22-B, Chandigarh.

…..Complainant

                 V E R S U S

1]  Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Ltd., SCO 139-140, Sector 9-C, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh 160017 through its Branch Manager

2]  Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Ltd. One Indiabulls Centre, Tower-1, 15^th & 16^th Floor, Jupiter Mill Compound, 841, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Road, Mumbai 400013 through its Managing Director

                      ……Opposite Parties

CORAM:   SH.P.D.GOEL                    PRESIDENT

         SH.RAJINDER SINGH GILL       MEMBER

         DR.(MRS).MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA  MEMBER

Argued by: Sh.Gaurav Bhardwaj, Counsel for Complainant.

           Sh.Pankaj Katia, Counsel for OP.

PER P.D.GOEL, PRESIDENT

         The complainant purchased three insurance policies namely “BSLI Bachat Money Back Plan” (Ann.C-1 to C-3) from OP Insurance Company on paying Single Premium of Rs.99,000/-, Rs.80,000/- & Rs.75,000/- respectively.  It is averred that the complainant was assured that these are the single premium investment policies and to be redeemed only after three years. Later on, IT CAME TO LIGHT that the premium is to be paid every year.  As such, complainant made a request to the OPs for cancellation of the policies, but the same was declined on the ground that it is not within 15 days free look period. Hence, this complaint alleging the above act of OPs as gross deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

2]       OPs filed reply and admitted the issuance of three insurance policies to the complainant.  It is submitted that the policies in question were issued to the complainant according to the application forms duly filled by him after going through its contents and accepting the same as correct.  Moreover, in the policy documents, there is specific mention of Free Look Period Option whereby the option is given to the policyholder to get his policy cancelled in case, he is not satisfied with its terms & conditions, but the complainant never opted for the same, which shows that he was satisfied with its terms & conditions, hence his request for cancellation was rejected.  Pleading no deficiency in service and denying rest of the allegations of the complainant, it is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.

3]       Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

4]      We have heard the ld.Counsel for the parties and have also perused the record.

5]       Admittedly the complainant purchased three insurance policies, namely, BSLI Bachat Money Back Plan (Ann.C-1 to c-3) from OP Insurance Company.

6]       The allegation of the complainant is that he was assured that all these insurance policies are single premium investment plans, to be redeemed only after 3 years. But later on, he noticed that the premium is to be paid every year.  The request of the complainant to cancel the policies was declined.

7]       The ld.Counsel for the OPs contended that the insurance policies in question were issued according to the application forms filled-in by the complainant after going through its contents and accepting the same as correct.  It was lastly argued that even in the policy documents issued to the complainant, there is a specific mention about the Option to Cancel the policy, whereby the policyholder could get his policy cancelled in case he is not satisfied with the terms & conditions, but the complainant never opted for the same.

8]       Now the point for consideration is whether the policies were issued to the complainant as per the application form duly filled-in by him.  The answer to this is in the affirmative.

9]       The complainant himself has placed on record the policy documents along with application forms of all three insurance policies issued to him.  A close scrutiny of it at Pages No.15, 30 & 45, makes it clear that the Payment Mode, under Clause 8 of Payment Details, has been opted as Annually.  The said application forms contained the signatures of the complainant at Page Nos.16, 31 & 46 respectively. Therefore, it can legitimately be concluded that the complainant is signatory to the application forms, thus he is estopped from raising the plea that the mode of payment was Single Premium and not Annual. 

10]      More so, the complainant has not availed the Option to Cancel the policy within 15 calendar days period, from the receipt of the policy documents, as provided to him, through policies documents Ann.C-1 to C-3 at Page Nos.8, 23 & 38 respectively.

11]      As a result of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that there is no merit in the complaint.  The same is dismissed accordingly.  Parties are left to bear their own costs.

         Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge.  The file be consigned.