Tamil Nadu

South Chennai

CC/127/2014

Muntazar Mahdi Juddy - Complainant(s)

Versus

Chief Operating Officer, Aviva Life Insurance Co., India Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

S.Muthukrishnan

12 Sep 2022

ORDER

Date of Complaint Filed : 10.03.2014

Date of Reservation      : 18.08.2022

Date of Order               : 12.09.2022

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (SOUTH), CHENNAI-3.

 

PRESENT:    TMT. B. JIJAA, M.L.,                                           : PRESIDENT

                       THIRU. T.R. SIVAKUMHAR, B.A., B.L.,           :  MEMBER  I 

                       THIRU. S. NANDAGOPALAN., B.Sc., MBA.,    : MEMBER II

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT No.127/2014

MONDAY, THE 12^th DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022

Muntazar Mahdi Juddy,

No.10, General Patters Road,

Chennai 600 002.                                                        ... Complainant                

 

..Vs..

 

Chief Operating Officer,

Aviva Life Insurance Co., India Ltd.,

Ashirwad Towers,

Plot No.2, Old No.182,

III Floor, 

Kodambakkam High Road,

Chennai – 600 034.                                                    ...  Opposite Party

 

******

Counsel for the Complainant          : M/s. S. Muthukrishnan

Counsel for the Opposite Party       : M/s. Elveera Ravindran

 

On perusal of records and having treated written Arguments as oral arguments on endorsement made by the Complainant and after having heard the oral arguments of the Counsel for the Opposite Party, we delivered the following:

ORDER

Pronounced by the President Tmt. B. Jijaa, M.L.,

1.      The Complainant has filed this complaint as against the Opposite Party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and prays to  direct

 

Party to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- as compensation and direct the Opposite Party to reinstate Policy No.ALS2295790 together with all accrued monetary due and direct the Opposite Party to furnish all the details of payment along with cost of this complaint.

2.     The averments of Complaint in brief are as follows:-

The Complainant took an Insurance Policy vide No. ALS 2295790 on 09.01.2009 for an assured sum of 2,50,000/- with the Opposite Party. The half yearly premium payable towards the above policy was Rs.25,000/- and the maturity date being 09.01.2026. The Complainant had made 6 premium payments of Rs.25,000/- each totalling Rs.1,50,000/- for the above policy. Owing to financial commitments he was unable to keep up further payments schedule. As his financial possession improved he wanted to continue payment towards the above policy and contacted the Opposite Party with a request to furnish him the details of payment due towards the above policy and to reinitiate the same but the Opposite Party failed to furnish any details. The Complainant had sent a letter dated 24.09.2013 to the Opposite Party. No reply was received from the Opposite Party. The act committed by the Opposite Party caused severe untold mental agony, hardship and irreparable loss to the Complainant. Therefore the Complainant issued a legal notice to the Opposite Party. But so far no reply was received from the Opposite Party, which clearly indicates deficiency of service and negligence. Hence the complaint.

 

 

3. Written Version filed by the Opposite Party in brief is as follows:-

        The complaint is hopelessly barred by limitation.  The complaint does not come under the realm of the Consumer complaint in as much as the Complainant had invested in a ULIP POLICY and as such had invested his money to earn interest on the amount which had been invested by him and as such he is excluded from the consumer definition. The Complainant after duly understanding all the terms and conditions of the policy had availed Insurance Policy namely Life Saver Plus Policy – United Link bearing Policy No.ALS2295790 commencing from 09.01.2009 for a sum assured of Rs.2,50,000/- with half yearly premium of Rs.25,000/- for a term of 17 years and the maturity dated being 09.01.2006.  The policy document was furnished to the Complainant on 13.01.2009. The Complainant did not opt for cancellation for the said policy within the free look period of 15 days. Therefore the terms of the policy is binding of the Complainant. The Complainant had paid the premium for the period of 3 years and from the 4^th year he failed to pay the premium amount. The Policy lapsed on 09.08.2011. The Opposite Party had sent a letter dated 31.10.2013 to the Complainant intimating that the policy is auto foreclosed due to non receipt of premium since 09.01.2012.  After the policy holder has paid regular premium for at least 3 policy years, if the surrender value of the units pertaining to regular premium becomes equivalent to regular premium paid in the first policy year then the policy automatically terminates and only the surrender value as per the terms and condition of the policy shall be paid. The Opposite Party had paid a sum of Rs.50,000/- being the surrender value through cheque. However the cheque was returned with an endorsement “No Such Person”. The Opposite Party is still ready and willing to fulfil its commitments letter dated 31.10.2013. Hence there is no deficiency in service provided by the Opposite Party and the complaint may be dismissed with extemporary cost.

4.   The Complainant submitted his Proof Affidavit and Written Arguments. On the side of the Complainant, documents Ex.A-1 to Ex.A-3  were marked. The Opposite Parties submitted his Written Version and Proof Affidavit and on the side of Opposite Party Ex.B1 to Ex.B6 were marked.

Points for Consideration

1. Whether there is deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party?

2. Whether the Complainant is entitled for reliefs claimed?

3. To what other reliefs the Complainant is entitled to?

Point No.1:

The Complainant had availed insurance policy namely Life Saver Plus Policy bearing Policy No. ALS 2295790 on 09.01.2009 for a sum assured of Rs.2,50,000/- with half yearly premium for a policy term of 17 years, the maturity date being 09.01.2026 and the Complainant had paid 6 premiums totally for a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- to the Opposite Party are undisputed facts.

        The dispute arose when the Complainant defaulted to pay premium amounts towards the said policy from the 4^th year, due to which the policy lapsed, and the Opposite Party did not heed to his request for reinstatement.

        The contention of the complaint was that owing to his financial commitment particularly for his son’s higher education he was not able to keep the payment schedule. When his financial position improved he approached the Opposite Party who requested to send a letter for re instatement of the Policy. Accordingly the Complainant had sent a letter on 24.09.2013 Ex.A2 the receipt of which is denied by Opposite Party. The Opposite Party did not furnish the details of payment due and his efforts to reinstate the policy went in vain.

        The contention of the Opposite Party that the complaint is barred by limitation will not hold good for the policy maturity date is until 2026 which is continuous cause of action and hence the complaint is well within limitation. Further the contention that the Complainant is not a consumer as he has invested in the ULIP Policy is not sustainable as the Complainant has availed service from the Opposite Party for a consideration which falls within the definition of the consumer and does not falls under any of the exclusions prescribed under the definition of Consumer. The Opposite Party contented that along with the policy document the right to reconsider notice was provided to the Complainant. According to the Right to Reconsider notice, the Complainant should have cancelled the Policy within 15 days from the date of receipt of the policy document if he disagrees with any of the terms and conditions of the policy. The Complainant did no opt to cancel the policy  therefore the terms and conditions of the policy strictly binding upon the Complainant. It is pertinent to note that the Complainant had not disputed the terms and conditions of policy. He had only sought for reinstatement of the policy which was lapsed after payment of premium for a period of 3 years. Though the letter sent by the Complainant on 24.09.2013, Ex.A2 seeking the Opposite Party to furnish the account details of his policy so as to enable him to reinitiate the policy is denied by the Opposite Party, the Complainant had also sent a legal notice dated 16.12.2013, Ex.A3  calling upon the Opposite Party to reinitiate his policy and to inform the Complainant of the premium dues which was received by the Opposite Party and the reply notice dated 09.03.2014 was also issued on behalf of the Opposite Party.

        The Opposite Party contented that the they had sent a letter dated 31.10.2013 addressed to the Complainant intimating that the Policy is auto foreclosed due to non receipt of premium since 09.01.2012. After the policy holder had paid regular premium for at least three years, if the surrender value of units pertaining to regular premium becomes equivalent to regular premium paid in the 1^st Policy year, then the policy shall automatically terminate and only the surrender value as per the terms and condition of the policy shall be paid. The Opposite Party paid a sum of Rs.50,000/- being the surrender value through cheque but the same was returned with endorsement as “No Such Person”. It is very much clear that the Complainant expressed his intention of continuing the policy and was prepared to pay the premium dues within 2 years from the last date of the paid premium. But the Opposite Party was not inclined to furnish the account statement pertaining to the Policy of the Complainant stating that the Policy account statement of the Complainant could not be generated since for the policy stood auto foreclosed. On the other hand it could be seen from Ex.B-6 that the Opposite Party has generated a policy account statement on 23.06.2022 showing the transaction period from 09.01.2009 to 30.06.2015 which statement was not furnished when the Complainant sought for at an earlier point of time.

        In view of the foregoing discussion this Commission is of the considered view that the Opposite Party was lethargic in complying with the request of the Complainant to reinitiate him in the policy availed and failed to furnish the payment details when sought for by the Complainant expressing his readiness to pay the premium dues. Though the Opposite Party contend that a sum of Rs.50,000/- has been issued to the Complainant there is no proof of such payment to the Complainant and its alleged return, amounts to deficiency in service. Accordingly point No.1 is answered.

Point No.2 & 3:-

As the Opposite Party has committed deficiency in service as discussed in Point No.1 the Opposite Party is liable to pay a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- as compensation to the Complainant and to pay a sum of Rs.3000/- towards costs. Accordingly, Point Nos. 2 and 3 are answered.

In the result the complaint is allowed in part. The Opposite Party is directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- (Rupees One Lakh and Fifty Thousand Only) as compensation to the Complainant and to pay a sum of Rs.3000/- (Rupees Three Thousand Only) towards costs  to the Complainant, within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the above amounts shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a from the date of receipt of this order till the date of payment.

In the result the Complaint is allowed.

Dictated to Steno-Typist, transcribed and typed by her, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Commission, on 12^th of September 2022.

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                   B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                        PRESIDENT

 

 List of documents filed on the side of the Complainant:-

Ex.A1	09.01.2009	Copy of Aviva Life Insurance Co. Policy No.ALS 2295790
Ex.A2	24.09.2013	Copy of Letter by Speed Post to Aviva Life Insurance Co
Ex.A3	16.12.2013	Copy of Legal Notice sent to Aviva Life Insurance Co.

 

List of documents filed on the side of the Opposite Parties:-

 

Ex.B1	-	Copy of Proposal form signed by the Complainant
Ex.B2	-	Copy of Policy schedule
Ex.B3	-	Copy of Policy Wordings
Ex.B4	31.10.2013	Copy of letter sent by the Opposite Party to Complainant
Ex.B5	09.03.2014	Copy of reply notice sent by Counsel of Opposite Party to the Complainant
Ex.B6	23.06.2022	Copy of Aviva Life Insurance Policy Statement

 

 

S. NANDAGOPALAN               T.R. SIVAKUMHAR                    B.JIJAA

         MEMBER II                       MEMBER I                         PRESIDENT