DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,<br /> BATHINDA (PUNJAB)<br /> <br /> CC No. 371 of 30-11-2009<br /> Decided on : 17-06-2010 <br /> <br /> Krishan Gopal, R/o #5875, Heera Chowk, Sirki Bazar, Bathinda.<br /> <br /> .... Complainant<br /> Versus<br /> <br /> 1.Birla Sun Life Insurance, Bathinda, through its Branch Manager.<br /> 2.Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Ltd., 6th Floor, Vaman Centre, Makhwana Road, Off. Andheri-Kurla Road, Near Marol Naka, Andheri (E) Mumbai 400 059, Reg. No. 109, through its Director/ M.D./ Authorised Signatory <br /> ..... Opposite parties<br /> <br /> Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection<br /> Act, 1986.<br /> <br /> QUORUM <br /> <br /> Ms. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President<br /> Sh. Amarjeet Paul, Member<br /> <br /> For the Complainant : Sh. Pardeep Kumar, counsel for the complainant <br /> For the Opposite parties : Sh. Varun Gupta, counsel for the<br /> opposite parties. <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> 1. The complainant is a holder of policy bearing No. 001329144 dated 10-12-2007of the opposite parties under plan as Birla Sun Life Insurance Saral Jeevan and deposited a sum of Rs. 11,316/- in the office of opposite party No. 1 vide receipt No. 3089784. Thereafter the complainant had deposited two installments of Rs. 2830/- each vide receipt Nos.11757563 and 9567594 dated 22-04-2009 and 05-01-2009 respectively. Total sum insured of the policy was Rs. 1,20,000/- and mode of payment was quarterly installment. The complainant alleged that he came to know through somebody that the company of the opposite parties would be closed by Government and no amount will be paid to anyone. So, he requested opposite party No. 1 to give transaction details and he found that amount of Rs. 5,829/- has been withdrawn on 10-05-2009. The complainant also got served legal notice upon the opposite parties through his counsel for getting information that under whose signature an amount of Rs. 5829/- was withdrawn from his account and opposite parties replied to the said notice that it shall take some time to get the necessary information from different departments of BSLI and concerned persons, but no explanation was sent by the opposite party.<br /> 2. The opposite parties pleaded that after receipt of legal notice from the complainant they had replied that matter is under investigation as they have to collect necessary information from the department of BSLI. They further pleaded that Insurance policy purchased by the complainant is a unit linked insurance policy which indicates that the returns are linked to the stock market. The premium paid by the complainant was invested in the investment fund options opted by the complainant in accordance with the policy terms and conditions after deduction of the charges as mentioned in the policy contract. The investments or the value of units would fluctuate in accordance with the market volatility. The complainant was aware of the policy terms and conditions. He had also not paid the due premiums and his policy got lapsed. No withdrawal was ever made by any-one as alleged by the complainant. The policy contract issued to the complainant categorically states that “In this policy, the investment risk in investment portfolio is borne by the policyholder.”<br /> 3. Parties have led evidence in support of their pleadings. <br /> 4. Arguments heard and written submissions submitted by the parties perused. A perusal of record shows that the complainant purchased Insurance policy on 10-12-2007 from the opposite parties under plan Saral Jeevan policy. Sum assured under the policy was Rs. 1,20,000/- and the payment of the premium was quarterly. He deposited a sum of Rs. 11,316/- and Rs. 2830/- twice with the opposite parties. The complainant of his own without confirming status of his policy, assumed that opposite party No. 1 had withdrawn a sum of Rs. 5829/- from his account. In support of his this assertion, he has produced on record Transaction Details - Account Statement of his policy Ex. C-5. On the basis of this account statement, he got served legal notice upon the opposite parties which was replied by them vide Ex. C-9 mentioning therein that it would take sometime to get the necessary information from different department of BSLI and the concerned persons and requested to wait for the reply of this notice accordingly. It was further mentioned in this letter that this communication does not constitute in any manner their acceptance or denial to the allegations.<br /> Ex. R-2 are the terms and conditions of the policy which has been purchased by the complainant. Under the heading “When and how can I surrender my policy” it has been mentioned that :-<br /> “The plan offers the flexibility of surrendering the policy if the need arises anytime during the tenure of the policy. The surrender benefit will be the fund value after deducting the surrender charges. There will be no surrender charges from the 4th policy year. However, if the policy is surrendered before completing 3 policy years, the surrender benefit will be paid only at the end of third policy year. The surrender value as of the date of your surrender remains constant till paid to you.”<br /> Further under the heading “Can I make partial withdrawals from my policy” it finds mentioned that :<br /> “You are allowed to make unlimited partial withdrawals after 3 policy years free of cost. The minimum amount of partial withdrawal is Rs. 5000. There is no maximum limit subject to a balance of fund value equal to Rs. 12000/-.”<br /> From the above extracts, it is quite clear that no withdrawal can be made before three years. Moreover, a perusal of original policy account statement Ex. R-3 of the complainant for the period from 10-12-2007 to 22-04-2010 shows that there is no such withdrawal entry which means that no such withdrawal was ever done or any amount was ever withdrawn from the account of the policy holder. As the opposite parties have stated that the complainant had not been paying the premium regularly, hence his policy had been lapsed on this score. Thus, the complainant is free to revive his policy by depositing the regular premiums and he can withdraw the amount after three policy years. As no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties is proved, hence this complaint stands dismissed without any order as to cost. <br /> A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and the file be consigned to record.<br /> Pronounced<br /> 17-06-2010 (Vikramjit Kaur Soni)<br /> President <br /> <br /> <br /> (Amarjeet Paul) *ik Member <br /> <br />