Haryana

StateCommission

MA/80/2017

Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Limited - Complainant(s)

Versus

Jai Narain Gupta - Opp.Party(s)

Shri S.C. Thatai, counsel for the applicants

22 Jun 2017

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HARYANA, PANCHKULA

 

                                                Miscellaneous Application No. 80 of 2017

                                                Date of the Institution: 17.04.2017

                                                In First Appeal No. 116 of 2016

                                                Date of Decision: 22.06.2017

 

 

1.      Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Limited, 6^th Floor, Vaman Centre, Markhwana Road, Off Andheri Kurla Road, near Marol Naka, Andheri (East) Mumbai-59, through Ms. Aakriti Manocha, Assistant Manager-Legal.

 

2.      Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Limited, Sector 25, HUDA G.T. Road, Panipat, through its Branch Manager.

 

                                      Applicants-Appellants-Opposite Parties

 

Versus

 

Jai Narain Gupta son of Shri Jagan Nath Gupta, resident of House No.1340/13, Gaushala Mandi, Panipat.

 

…Respondent-Complainant

 

 

 

CORAM:    Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

Mr. Balbir Singh, Judicial Member.

                   

Present:-    Shri S.C. Thatai, counsel for the applicants.

 

 

                                                          O R D E R

 

NAWAB SINGH J, (ORAL)

 

          This order be read in continuation of the order dated January 13^th, 2017 passed by this Commission in First Appeal No.116 of 2016 titled ‘Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Limited and another Versus Jai Narain Gupta’. For facilitation, operative part of the order dated January 13^th, 2017 is reproduced as under:-

“Though the complainant was not entitled to refund of the entire amount, the District Forum wrongly ordered for the same. However, certainly the complainant is entitled to seek Policy Surrender Value. In view of this, the Insurance Company-opposite parties shall treat complainant’s request for refund as request for surrender and pay the benefits as permissible under Surrender Value of the Policy. It is ordered accordingly.”

 

2.      In view of the aforesaid order, the statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal was to be ordered to be refunded to the Insurance Company but it was inadvertently ordered to be refunded to the complainant.

3.      This being so, the statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited at the time of filing the appeal is ordered to be refunded to the Insurance Company against proper receipt and identification in accordance with rules.

4.      Disposed of accordingly.

 

 

June 22nd, 2017 D.R.

Balbir Singh Judicial Member

Nawab Singh President