Kerala

Kannur

CC/34/2007

Ashraf K.P. S/o Andru,Madolathil veedu,PO.vattoli,via kakkattil.kozhikode-673510 - Complainant(s)

Versus

Dyputy Divisional Manager , PLI,chief postmaster,general office,kerala circle TVM-695033 - Opp.Party(s)

14 Jul 2008

ORDER


In The Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum
Kannur
consumer case(CC) No. CC/34/2007

Ashraf K.P. S/o Andru,Madolathil veedu,PO.vattoli,via kakkattil.kozhikode-673510
...........Appellant(s)

Vs.

Dyputy Divisional Manager , PLI,chief postmaster,general office,kerala circle TVM-695033
...........Respondent(s)


BEFORE:


Complainant(s)/Appellant(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):


OppositeParty/Respondent(s):




Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

ORDER

14.7.08 Sri.K.Gopalan, President This is a complaint filed under section12 of the consumer protection Act for an order directing the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.4449/- as the balance amount of premium remitted and Rs.5, 000/- as compensation for mental agony. The cases of the complainant in brief are as follows: The complainant Ashraf joined in Postal Life Insurance Scheme on31.3.2003 for an assured sum of Rs.50000/- The policy number is KL.47275 UC. According to the scheme the complainant had to pay premium at the rate of Rs.238/- per month for 17years. Last premium due is February 2020 and date of maturity is 31.3.2020. The complainant had paid premium from 1.3.2003 to 4/2006. Thus complainant paid a total amount of Rs.8568/- by 36 months @ Rs.238/- p.m. Complainant could not continue the payment after 4/2006 because of financial stringency. Hence the complainant submitted application as per the advice to surrender the policy. After some days the complainant was informed to get back Rs.4119/-. When complainant enquired he was told that he is eligible only for that much amount since membership is lost. Though the complainant was entitled for Rs.8368/- he was paid only an amount of Rs.4119/-. It is even less than ½ of the amount he has remitted. Which is so painful? Hence this complaint for the balance amount with compensation. Opposite party filed version. The contentions of opposite party in brief are as follows. The Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the compliant. The complainant was issued with a postal Life Insurance Endowment Assurance Policy No.KL.47275-UC on31.3.2003, maturing at the age of 50 years for an assured sum of Rs.50,000/-. Age at entry was 33 years, he had to pay premium @Rs.238/- per month for 17 years. The complainant applied for surrender of policy on 4.10.2006. Surrender sanction was issued on 30.10.2006. The surrender value of the policy was Rs.5597/-. For surrendering the policy should be in force. Since the request for surrender was in October, 2006, a sum of Rs.1478/-(towards premium from 5/2006 to 10/2006, along with interest) was recovered from surrender value and net amount of Rs.4119/- was paid to the insurant. Surrender calculation is being made as per formula prescribed by Postal Life Insurance Directorate, New Delhi In this case, no Bonus was paid as the PLI policy was surrendered before completion of five years. On the above pleadings the following issues are framed for consideration:- 1. Whether the complaint is maintainable? 2. Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party? 3. Whether the complainant is entitled for the relief as prayed in the complaint? 4. Relief and cost. The evidence consists of the oral testimony of PW1, DW1 and documents Ext.A1 to A5 and B1 to B4. Issues 1 to 4: Admittedly Sri.Ashraf.K.P, the complainant joined in Postal Life Insurance Policy bearing No.KL.47275-UC DT. 31.3.2003 for an assured sum of Rs.50, 000/- with the condition to pay premium at the rate of Rs.238/- per month for 17 years. The complainant paid premium from 3/2003 to 4/2006. In other words a total amount of Rs.8568/- has been paid as premium for 36 months at the rate of Rs.238/- per month. Thereafter the insured – Ashraf applied for surrender value of the policy. All the transactions including enquiry, submitting application, disbursing of amount all taken place from the post office at Thalassery, which is within the jurisdiction of this Forum. PW1 has stated in his evidence that “3 There is no cross on the above aspect. Opposite party in his version has stated only that the Postal Life Insurance Policy was issued from the registered office at Trivandrum and the opposite party working at Trivandrum has no branch office within the local limits of District Forum, Kannur. Para 4 of the version stated that on the first surrender application dt.4.10.2006 was forwarded to this office by Superintendent of Post offices, Thalassery Division vide letter dated 6.10.2006 and surrender sanction memo was issued on 30.10.2006. The evidence stated above proves that those transactions stated with respect to the subject matter have been taken place within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum. Item 4 of Ext.B1 specifically stated that a policy holder is permitted to pay his premium at any departmental post office of his choice in Kerala circle. There are no specifications in the condition that the opposite party has no branch office within the local limits of this Forum. Local post office and the opposite party are part of one and the same department and thus this Forum has territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint and the complaint is maintainable. Admittedly complainant paid premium up to 4/2006. The date of maturity is 31.3.2020. The application of surrender the policy submitted on 4.10.2006. Here it can be seen that the policy is not in full force at the time when the policy was surrendered. The complainant is entitled as per item 8 of Ext.B1 to revive the discontinued policy. The policy in question was taken for a period of 17 years, but the complainant surrendered the policy after 3 years. Surrender sanction was ordered on 30.10.2006. Net value was Rs.4119/-.Ext.B2 (1) shows that surrender value of the policy was Rs.5597/-. As per item 14 of Ext.B1 and Endowment Assurance policy may be surrendered for an immediate cash payment provided the policy is in force and has completed 3 years. The complainant’s policy was not in force, at that time when the policy was surrendered. It was discontinued from 4/2006. For surrendering, the policy should be in force. Hence a sum of Rs.1478 was recovered from surrender value and net amount of Rs.4119/- paid to the complainant. Ext.B2 (2) shows that surrendered factor is calculated according to date of birth and d ate of application for surrender. Ext.A3 shows the conditions of surrender and the calculation of surrender factor. For 36 years it is 0.511. Ext.B2 (2) calculation it can be seen the surrender factor for 4 months is 0.008. The total comes to 0.519. As per Ext.B2 (2) the paid up value is Rs.10784.31 (50000 X 44 ---204). So that the surrender value calculated as 5597 (10784, 31 X 0.519) a sum of Rs.1478 towards the premium from 5/06 to 10/06 along with interest was deducted (as recovery from the surrender value) in order to calculate the net value Rs.4119/- . (5597-1478). Ext.B2(1)(3),B3 andB4 would go to show that the surrender value is being made as per the formula prescribed by Department of Posts, Min is try of Communication and IT. Ext.A3 sent by 0opposite party to complainant on 30.10.2006 is the surrender sanction memo. The sanction remains valid up to 29.10.2007. Validity of one year duration herein carries much importance. The complainant has given enough time and opportunity to take decision whether the policy need necessarily be surrendered on that point of time or not. By Ext.A3 he is informed the actual amount for which he is entitled. If he desires to continue the policy complainant could have done it by reviving the same. Ext.A4 is the notice sent by the complainant. Ext.A5 is the reply to Ext.A4. Ext.A5 shows the reason for the calculation and reason for the denial of the bonus etc. In Ext.B3 item ‘c’ specifically stated that the discontinued policy shall not attract bonus i.e. the date from which the premium is discontinued. So the analysis of the evidence undoubtedly makes it clear that the complainant surrendered the policy and received the amount knowing fully well all the details in respect of calculation of amount and conditions of surrender. Thus it can only be concluded that the opposite party has acted in accordance with the terms and conditions of Postal Life Insurance. It is therefore we are of the opinion that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. So issues 2 to 4 are found against the complainant. In the result, the complaint is dismissed. No order as to costs. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- President Member Member APPENDIX Exhibits for the Complainant A1.Copy of the Postal Life Insurance policy issued by OP dt.31.3.2003 A2. Copy of the receipt book issued by OP. A3.Copy of the letter dt.30.10.2006 issued by OP A4. Copy of the lawyer notice sent to OP dt.30.11.2006. A5. Reply notice dt.28.12.06 sent by OP. Exhibits for the opposite party B1, Copy of the policy B2.&B2(2) Copy of surrender calculation sheets B3.Conditions of surrender of postal life insurance B4.Letter dt.18.11.2003 issued from Directorate of Postal life Insurance to OP Witness examined for the complainant PW1.Complainant Witness examined for the opposite party DW1.M.Mohandas /forwarded by order/ Senior Superintendent Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kannur.