Punjab

Nawanshahr

EA/13/2018

Jaswinder Kaur - Complainant(s)

Versus

HDFC Standard Life Insurance - Opp.Party(s)

Jatin Sharma

24 Apr 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM

SHAHEED BHAGAT SINGH NAGAR

Execution Application No.      :    13 of 2018

Date of Institution                             :    01.11.2018

Date of Decision:                    :    24.04.2019

 

Jaswinder Kaur W/o Rampal R/o Village Kathgarh, Tehsil Balachaur, District SBS Nagar.                                                                                                                                                                              ….Decree Holder

Versus

1. HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company Limited, Branch above ICICI Bank Banga Road, through its Branch Manager.
2. HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company Limited, Registered Office, 11^th Floor, Lodha Excelus, Apollo Mill Compound, N.M. Joshi Road, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai – 400011, through its General Manager.
3. HDFC Bank Limited, College Road, Ropar, District Roop Nagar, through its Branch Manager.
4. HDFC Bank Limited, Trade World, A Wing, Ground Floor, Opposite Kamala Mills Compound, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400013, through its Managing Director.

…. JDs

                             (Application U/s 27 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986

QUORUM:

SH.KULJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

SH.KANWALJEET SINGH, MEMBER

 

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

For DH                                    :         Sh.Jatin Sharma, advocate

For JD No.1&2                        :         Sh.M.P. Nayyar, Advocate  

For JD No.3&4                       :         Sh.H.S. Saini, Advocate

 

 

ORDER

          PER KANWALJEET SINGH, MEMBER

1. This order will disposed of an execution application moved by DH.  The brief facts of the application are that DH/complainant filed above titled complaint before this Forum and same was disposed of vide order dated 11.12.2014.  Inspite of passing of said order, the JDs have not complied with the order of this Forum and has not made the payment to the complainant as per order.  The DH has severally approached the JDs and requested them to accept the claim of the complainant and to comply with the order of this Forum but they refused to accept the legal demands of complainant. Due to said act of JDs, the DH has suffered huge financial loss and mental agony and harassment. A prayer has made for necessary action be taken against JDs and JDs be directed to make payment to DH as per order dated 11.12.2014. 
2. Upon summoning, JD No.1&2 has appeared and filed joint objections giving more forced therein that vide order dated 11.12.2014 under Para No.12, 13 which are as under:-

“12.   A bare perusal of the aforesaid conditions would show that even in case of payment of one premium refund of surrender value is not totally ruled out but its payment has been kept at the discretion of insurance company.  It is now well settled principle of law that discretion vested in any authority cannot be exercised by it unjustly and arbitrarily.  Insurance Company as such can only exercise such discretion in view of Insurance Regulatory & Development Authority (Linked Insured Products) Regulation, 2013 whereunder complainant will be entitled to fund value or the policy after deduction of 6% with other charges in terms of regulation 13 and the fund value so arrived at will be payable on completion of five years of commencement of policy.

13.     In view of our above observation though complainant cannot be granted the relief as sought for under the present complaint but he can have recourse to the OPs and seek fund value of the amount paid by him to the OPs on expiry of period of five years from the date of commencement of the policy in question i.e. 21.08.2013, if so advised.”

3. Further, it is stated that DH has submitted to the opposite parties, a proposal/application dated 19.08.2013 & 19.09.2013 for purchase of HDFC SL Classic Assure Insurance Policy (Traditional Policies), the proposal was accepted on the standard rates based on the information provided by LA and consequently a policy bearing No.16244679 dated 28.08.2013 was issued and same commenced on 19.08.2013 and other policy bearing No.16322828 dated 11.10.2013 was issued and same commenced on 20.09.2013.  Since, the insurance policy in question was traditional policy, therefore, the same had no link with the share market and hence, Insurance Regulatory & Development Authority (Linked Insured Products) Regulations, 2013 is not applicable to said policy. The complainant has paid only one premium, therefore, the policies got lapsed due to non-payment of premiums and there is no surrender value accrued in this policy.  As per Para No.13 of judgment passed by this Forum, it is quite evident that the Forum had observed that the complainant would have the recourse to seek fund value accrued under the policy after expiry of five years from the date of commencement of the policy. In the present case, there is no fund value as the policy in question was traditional policy having no link with the market, hence, no fund/surrender value ever accrued in the said policy and prayed that execution application does not sustain and same is liable to be dismissed with heavy costs.
4. Learned counsel for JD No.3&4 has filed separate joint objections stating therein that the claim of the DH is with regard to insurance claim and the same is to be decided by JD No.1&2. The JD No.1&2 are the only competent to accept or reject the claim of the claim of DH in view of orders passed by this Forum. There is no intentional and will full disobedience of orders passed by this Forum by OP No.3&4 and prayed for dismissal of execution application.
5. We have heard the counsel for the parties and gone through record very carefully with valuable assistance of counsel for parties, during pendency of this application.
6. The JDs have placed on record some documents which is Annexure – OP-1 i.e. policy documents.  On proposal form it is mentioned that “Traditional Proposal Limited Undertaking”. The fund value under the policy in question would only paid if all it accrued after five years. In the present application there is no fund value as policy of the DH has traditional policy having not linked with the market, hence no fund/surrender value accrued in the said policy.  Therefore, the DH is not liable to get anything under the policy.  It is settled principle of legal jurisprudence that executing court/Forum can only execute its order and having no power to go beyond the judgment/order which is under execution. Para No.12 and 13 of the judgment dated 11.12.2014 as reproduce above.  As per regulation 13 of the IRDA “Obligation of an insurer upon discontinuance of a policy before lock-in-period”. As per Clause a(2) : For Single Premium Policies:-… the charges levied on the date of discontinuance (as a percentage of one annualized premium or a percentage of single premium) do not exceed the limits specified in the said regulations.
7.    The JDs No. 1&2 also forcibly argued on that point that the policy in question was traditional plan which mean it is non-linked plan.  Accordingly, we have gone through the IRDA regulation non-linked clauses which are reproduced as under:-

13.     Policy Account Value:

a. Every variable non-linked insurance policy shall have a corresponding policy account whose balance shall depict the accrual to the policyholder. The policy account shall be credited with premium net of charges as stipulated in Regulation 35 of IRDA (Linked Insurance Products), Regulations, 2013, as applicable to variable insurance products. The guaranteed rate and variable interest rate shall be applicable to the balance of the policy account.

b. Shadow policy account value shall be maintained on a daily basis. Such shadow policy account shall be computed based on the actual accruals of all income elements like premiums, top-up premiums, income from investments as and when received and all actual debits i.e. partial withdrawals to the policy account value as and when debited, to arrive at the actual gross investment return and reduction in yield to the policy account value, at the end of each year starting from policy year 5.

c. The policy account value shall comply with the maximum reduction in yield requirements as stipulated in Regulation 37 of IRDA (Linked Insurance Products), Regulations, 2013.

14. Charges, Reduction in yield, Discontinuance Terms, Surrender Value, Partial withdrawals and Top-ups: All the provisions applicable to variable linked insurance products in accordance with the IRDA (Linked Insurance Products), Regulations, 2013 shall be applicable to the non-linked variable insurance products for charges, reduction in yield, discontinuance terms, surrender value, partial withdrawals, top-ups etc.

8.  From the above said IRDA regulations of linked/non linked of plan, the both are same as such, the DH is entitled for refund of payment. Accordingly, the JDs are directed to refund the amount as per IRDA regulation 2013 (supra) within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
9. File be indexed and consigned to record room.    

 

(Kanwaljeet Singh)       (Kuljit Singh)

Member                         President