BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.
Complaint No.: 85 of 2015.
Date of Institution: 26.03.2015.
Date of Order: 04.01.2019.
Anil Kumar son of Shri Mukhdev Sharma, resident of New Adarsh Nagar, near Bhardwaj Child Hospital, Bhiwani, Tehsil & District Bhiwani.
….Complainant.
Versus
1. Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Limited, G. D. Plaza, 1st Floor, Circular, near Bank of Baroda, Hansi Gate, Bhiwani through its Branch Manager.
2. Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Limited, one Indiabulls Centre Tower-1, 15th & 16th Floor, Jupiter Mill Compound, 841, Senapti Bapot Marg, Elphinstone Road, Mumbai-400013.
…...Opposite Parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the
Consumer Protection, Act, 1986.
Before: - Hon’ble Mr. Manjit Singh Naryal, President.
Hon’ble Mr. Parmod Kumar, Member.
Hon’ble Ms. Renu Chaudhary, Member.
Present: Shri Virender Yadav, Advocate for the complainant.
Shri Sandeep Sangwan, Advocate for the OPs.
ORDER:-
PER MANJIT SINGH NARYAL, PRESIDENT
Brief facts of the complainant’s case are that the agent of the OPs Company visited the house of the complainant and on the assurance given by the agent, the complainant became ready to purchase the policy in question. It is alleged that agent also told that if the policy was closed premature in that event total deposited amount alongwith interest and other benefits were given to the complainant. It is further alleged that upon the assurance of agent, the complainant purchase policy No.004315280 dated 16.8.2010 & paid Rs. 1,00,000/- as annual premium as first installment of the policy. It is further alleged that the complainant due to financial problems closed the above said policy after depositing first installment and requested the OPs to refund the deposited amount of Rs.1,00,000/- alongwith interest and other benefits and surrender the policy. It is further alleged that the OPs Company wants to return only Rs.32,525.65/- as full & final payment and this was also given in writing by the official of the OPs on dated 15.1.2015 on the application of the complainant, but no amount or cheque given to the complainant. It is further alleged that the complainant moved an application on 16.1.2015 with the OPs, which was duly received by OPs, but the officials of OPs did not make the payment of amount of policy alongwith interest and other benefits. It is further alleged that the complainant is entitled to get Rs.1,00,000/- of premium alongwith interest and other benefits. It is further alleged that after submitting all the form for refund the amount of premium, the complainant had visited the OPs time and again for obtaining total amount of policy, but to no effect. Therefore, there is deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Hence, the present complaint.
2. Upon notice, opposite parties appeared and contested the complaint by filing written statement denying all the allegations of complainant. It is alleged that the OPs received a proposal from bearing No.A-37495681 duly filled and signed by the complainant seeking insurance on his life under the “BSLI Platinum Premier Base Term 10 Pay 10” and on the basis of information & declaration provided in proposal form and on receipt of first yearly premium, the OPs have issued the Policy No. 004315280 dated 16.8.2010. It is further alleged that complainant himself opted for the yearly premium of Rs.1,00,000/- which clearly indicated in proposal form and he had also signed a benefit illustration after fully understanding the terms & conditions of policy. It is further alleged that in accordance to Clause 6 (2) of the Insurance Regulatory & Development Authority (Protection of Policy Holder’s Interests) Regulations, 2002 every document sent by, it is accompanied by a forwarding letter which clearly mentions that in case policy holder is not satisfied with the features or the terms & conditions of the policy, he can withdraw/ return the policy within 15 days i.e. under the “Free Look Period” provision. It is further alleged that as per Regulation 4 (1) of the IRDA a copy of proposal form duly signed by the policy holder is also sent to the policy holder and was duly received alongwith the policy document thereby giving an opportunity to the policy holder to understand the terms & conditions and approach the company, if any discrepancy. It is further alleged that the complainant retained the policy documents and did not raise any objection towards the policy during the free look period or even after that with any of his grievance regarding the policy or its terms & conditions, meaning thereby he agreed to the policy and its terms & conditions. It is further alleged that the policy holder has paid the premium only once and after no premium amount was paid. It is further alleged that on 16.9.2011 the policy went into lapsed state and finally terminated on 16.9.2013. It is further alleged that as per the policy terms & conditions “if we do not received the policy premium by due date you will be given a grace period of 30 days during which time all coverage under the policy will continue. If we do not receive the entire policy premium by the end of grace period policy will be deemed lapsed and all coverage will be ceased immediately. The lapse date is the date the unpaid premium was due. You will then have two years from the lapse date to revive your policy”. It is further alleged that the OPs follow the entire guidelines issued by IRDA from time to time. It is further alleged that the OPs deals only in Life Insurance nothing else. It is further alleged that the complainant opted to pay Rs.1,00,000/- per annum as premium against the sum assured Rs.5,00,000/- and he opted the policy term of the plan as 10 years and premium paying term as 10 years and payment method direct bill i.e. by cash payment mode annually. It is further alleged that on the face of the proposal form there is specifically mentioned that in this policy, the investment risk in investment portfolio is born by the policy holder. It is further alleged that the OPs did not receive any letter from the complainant. It is further alleged that the complainant can get the value of the policy as per terms & conditions of the policy. It is further alleged that this is a Unit Linked Insurance Policy and the actual payment of benefits in this policy will vary, based on the actual performance of Investment Fund chosen by the policy holder, which may increase or decrease as per the performance of the financial markets. It is further alleged that policy lapsed due to non-payment of renewal premium. Hence, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs and prayed for dismissal of the complaint with costs.
3. Ld. Counsel for the complainant in support of his case placed on record Annexure C1 to Annexure C5 in his evidence.
4. We have heard the complainant and ld. counsel for the OP No. 3 at length and have gone through the case file carefully.
5. It is contended by the learned counsel for the complainant that the complainant believing the OPs invested the amount of Rs. 1,00,000/-, but due to some financial problem, the complainant failed in depositing such a huge amount of premium. Ld. counsel for the complainant further contended that the complainant approached the OPs for surrender of the policy, however, when the free look period expired then the Ops asked the complainant that the period of 15 days had already elapsed. He further contended that in this way, the Ops were having dishonest intention from the very beginning and as such, the complainant is entitled to refund of Rs.1,00,000/- & compensation of Rs.50,000/- for mental agony and harassment.
6. From the above said contentions that it is clear that the Ops did not refund the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- during the 15 days of free look period and delayed the matter on one pretext or the other and deceived the complainant. Complainant has successfully proved his case by placing on record certain documents i.e. Annexure C1 to C5. On the other hand, the OPs have failed to produce some documentary evidence on record in support of their stand taken by them in written statement. Moreover, the OPs have taken the hard earned money from the complainant for investment purpose in market and the complainant after paying this amount to OPs has never taken any benefit or service from the OPs. The OPs are still enjoying the usufruct of this huge amount of Rs.1,00,000/-. It is also considered by us that the OPs have also borne some processing expenditure i.e. commission of agent etc. etc. at the time of issuing the insurance policy. In such circumstances and in the interest of justice, the complainant is entitled to be refunded at least an amount of Rs. 50,000/- being 50% of the premium deposited by him with the OPs.
7. Therefore, in view of the above facts and circumstances, the complaint of the complainant is partly allowed with costs and the OPs is directed to:-
i. To pay Rs.50,000/- to the complainant along with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing this complaint till its realization.
-
The compliance of the order shall be made within 30 days from the date of the order. Certified copies of the order be sent to parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.
Announced in open Forum.
Dated: 04.01.2019.
(Renu Chaudhary) (Parmod Kumar) (Manjit Singh Naryal)
Member. Member. President,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.
