Judgment dated 27-07-2016

                This is a complaint made by one Shri Tamoghno Banerjee of 43/6/62, Jheel Road, Mayukh, Flat 6, Kolkata- 700031, P.S. Garfa against ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Company Limited, 145, Rashbehari Avenue, P.S. Gariahat, Kolkata-700029 OP No.1 and ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Company Limited Prabhadevi, Mumbai OP No.2 praying for a direction upon OP for paying a sum of Rs.3,31,250.03p as death benefit of the policy and compensation of Rs.1.5 lakhs  for harassment and mental agony of the Complainant and litigation cost.

            In brief the facts are that Complainant’s mother approached the ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Company Limited for a life Insurance and other guaranteed savings plan of sum assured value of Rs.3,50,000/- on annual premium of Rs.50,000/- in which Complainant was declared as nominee. Policy bearing no.15793015 was issued on 30/7/2011. Complainant’s mother paid three premiums from the date of commencement till June, 2014. On 18/6/2014 death claim of Complainant’s mother was submitted by OP No.1 as per the policy highlights. There was a guaranteed benefit in the policy OP paid Rs.1,68,749.69 towards the death claim payout via direct credit in bank account on September 19, 2014. Complainant brought into the notice of OP regarding the dispute. OP replied stating that policy risk commencement is 31/7/2011 and as per the policy highlights payment was made. Complainant did not accept the contention of the OP and requested for paying Rs.3,31,250.30. OP did not oblige. Complainant by making a payment as per the demand and so this case was filed.

            OP No.1 & 2 filed written version stating that the complaint is not maintainable. They also referred certain judgments to establish that nominee cannot be beneficiary under the life insurance policy. Further they have alleged that they paid as per the terms of the policy and the demand of Complainant is excessive and in genuine. So OP prayed for dismissal of this case.

            On the basis of above facts the complaint was admitted and written version was filed by the OPs. Thereafter Complainant filed affidavit-in-chief against which OP filed questionnaire and Complainant filed affidavit-in-reply. Similarly OP filed evidence against which Complainant filed questionnaire and OP filed affidavit-in-reply. Written argument has been filed by both the sides.

Decision with reasons

            Main point for determination is whether Complainant is entitled to relief as prayed for.

            On perusal of the prayer portion of the Complainant it appears that Complainant has prayed for a direction upon OP for making payment to the tune of Rs.3,31,250.30 and Rs. 1.5 lakhs compensation with litigation cost if any.

            So the question is as to how Complainant arrived at this figure. There are two courses open to the Complainant for making demand from the OPs. First is the death benefit as because the mother of the Complainant died after paying three premiums of the policy. If that is taken into account the amount comes to Rs.1,81,250.31. But it appears that by making a demand of Rs.3,31,250  Complainant did not adopt this course and perhaps chose to go for the death benefit in terms of ten times of annualized premium and since he has received Rs.1,68,749, the amount after deduction comes to what he has prayed.

            On perusal of affidavit-in-chief by the Complainant, questionnaire submitted by OP and affidavit-in-reply by the Complainant on the one hand and evidence of OP followed by questionnaire by Complainant and affidavit-in-reply by OP, it is clear that bo0th the sides have made attempt to arrive on the amount which is beneficial and suitable to them.

            However, the legal provision does not support either of the parties and it suggests that the death benefit is as per the term of the policy for a premium paying or fully paid policy is sum assured plus accrued guaranteed additions. In the present case Complainant has been deprived of even sum assured which is Rs.3,50,000/- .

            There is settled proposition of law that life insurance is purchased for the security of the heirs of the insured and in case of death of the insurer minimum amount which has to be paid to insurance company cannot be less than the sum assured. This fact has been affirmed in a decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court (Life Insurance Corporation of India vs Mani Ram (2005) Insc 395 (5 August, 2005).

            So the picture which emerges suggest that Complainant was deprived to the tune of Rs.1,81,250.31p and this is the obligation of the OPs to pay this amount to the Complainant with interest of 10% after 2 months of this order. In addition Complainant appears to be entitled to litigation cost of Rs.20,000/-.

            So far as the prayer for compensation is concerned, the circumstances do not suggest that Complainant be given compensation of Rs.1.5 lakhs.

            Hence,

            O R D E R E D

            CC/81/2015 and the same is allowed on contest in part. OPs are directed to pay Rs.1,81,250.31p as death benefit and Rs.20,000/- as litigation cost within 2 months of this order, in default, the amount shall carry an interest of 10% p.a. Liability of both the OPs are joint and several.