Order by:
Sh.Mohinder Singh Brar, Member
1. Complainant has filed the instant complaint under section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 on the allegations that being allured by Opposite Party No.2, the complainant availed Pension Plus Policy Plan no. 803 bearing no. 133338334 dated 28.04.2011 for terms of 12 years on half-yearly premium at Rs. 13000/- from Opposite Party no.1. After purchasing the aforesaid policy, the complainant was regularly paying the premium to opposite party no.1. However, due to financial crises, the complainant did not pay last premium amounting to Rs.13000/- which was due in October, 2022 and he humbly requested the opposite party no.1, through Opposite Party No.2 to revoke the said policy and made request to pay the surrender value. Rather than accepting the request of complainant and revoking the said policy, opposite party no.1 issued a notice dated 29.11.2022 to complainant and gave two options to choose one of them, excerpts of which are as follows:
i) Revival of policy by paying arrears of premium with proper evidence of health.
or
(ii) complete withdrawal from the policy.
After receiving the abovesaid notice dated 29.11.2022 from the opposite party no.1, the complainant alongwith her son contacted the concerned official/manager of the opposite party no.1 and requested for complete withdrawal of money as stated in notice, but the concerned official present there pressurized the complainant to revive the policy and also to pay the remaining arrears of the policy to get complete withdrawal and told that otherwise 20% amount will be deducted from the surrender value. The complainant being an old lady of 71years was not able to tolerate pressure and as a result of such pressure, she suffered a heart attack and remained admitted in hospital for about 10 days. During such period, son of complainant met with the concerned manager, who in fact told to the son of complainant that if complainant would not pay the last premium amount, in that situation, 20% will be deducted from the surrender value and after paying the last premium, the complainant will be able to get complete withdrawal of money. Thereafter complainant somehow paid the last premium in the month of December, 2022 to get complete withdrawal of the amount. On 19.04.2023, the complainant alongwith his son had approached the office of Opposite Party no.1 and requested them to close the policy and pay the surrender value as they are in some urgent financial need and due to this reason, they cannot wait till the date of maturity of policy. Thereafter, the complainant filed the application for surrender the policy with Opposite Party no.1. The official present there provided the quotation mentioning the surrender value of the policy as Rs.5,16,801.77paise alongwith questionnaire. The complainant became agree for the said surrender value and handed over all the required documents and discharge form to Opposite Party no.1 as requested by them. The concerned official told the complainant that the said amount will be transferred in the bank account of the complainant till 03:00PM. Later on, the complainant's son received a phone call from the office of the Opposite Party no.1 and informed that as per the company's policy, 20% amount will be deducted from the surrender value and advised the complainant's son to wait for another 10 days and thereafter the complainant will get the full amount of Rs.5,16,801.77paise. The complainant's son agreed for the same. Thereafter on 28.04.2023 i.e. on the day when the policy gets matured, the complainant's son again visited the office of opposite party no.1 for getting her money back, but to the utter disappointment of complainant, concerned official of opposite party no.1 flatly refused to pay the amount and told her that meagre amount of Rs. 800/- will be credited to complainant's account every month as her pension money. After that, the complainant time and again made requests to the Opposite Parties for the redressal of her grievances, but the Opposite Parties till date did not pay any heed to the request of the complainant. The aforesaid act of the opposite parties for non-redressal of his grievances is illegal, unwarranted and uncalled for. Hence this complaint. Vide instant complaint, the complainant has sought the following reliefs:-
a) Opposite Parties may be directed to pay the amount of Rs.5,16,801 alongwith interest thereon @ 24% per annum from the date of maturity till actual realization.
b) To pay an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation.
c) To pay an amount of Rs.18,000/- as litigation expenses.
d) And any other relief which this Commission may deem fit and proper be also granted to complainant in the interest of justice and equity.
2. Opposite Parties appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing written replies.
Opposite Party no.1 filed the written reply taking preliminary objections therein inter alia that the present complaint is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed due to non-joinder of necessary parties. The corporate office of the answering opposite party is a necessary party before this commission, in the absence of which the present complaint cannot be adjudicated; the present complaint is maintainable and is liable to be dismissed as the complainant has no cause of action to file the same. Averred that the policy opted by the complainant is in fact a Pension Plan and no lump sum amount as claimed by the complainant is payable once it is matured/vested on 28.04.2023. On the basis of documents called by the answering opposite party, commuted value will be paid if opted for by the complainant alongwith pension after exercising the options for the same. There is no deficiency in rendering services on the part of the answering opposite party. As per the policy record, Smt. Indra Devi has purchased the pension plus policy no.133338334 under plan term 803/12/12 with plus the age at entry 59 years, the date of commencement 28.04.2011 by paying premium of Rs.13,000/- through half yearly mode. The nominee under the policy is Sh.Dinesh Jindal, son of the policy holder. The date of maturity in this case is 28.04.2023 and the status of the policy is 'Matured'. The policy holder/complainant had obtained the policy after fully understanding the terms and conditions of the same and to this effect duly signed the proposal form. The complainant paid all the premiums regularly except the last premium due on 10/2022, due to which a system generated discontinuous notice was sent to the policy holder on 29.11.2022 asking her to exercise one of the two options, either to opt for revival of the policy by paying the half yearly premium due on 10/2022 or for complete withdrawal from the policy. The complainant opted for the option no.1 for revival of the policy and deposited the premium on 20.12.2022 and the policy was regularized. On 19.04.2023 the policy holder enquired about the total fund value of her policy on which the pension would be payable to her. The system generated quotation showed the total value of the units as Rs.5,16,801.77NP as on 19.04.2023, which otherwise keeps on changing each day as NAV (Net Asset Value) changes with the market and so changes the number of units at a particular time. It does not mean that Rs.5,16,801.77NP is payable in lump-sum. The word surrender occurred along-with the quotation value as the system generated format for all the policies is the same, irrespective of the fact that whether the policy is capable of being surrendered or not. Neither any request was submitted by the complainant/policy holder for complete withdrawal from the policy nor any document was ever submitted with Opposite Party no.1 for the alleged pre-mature surrender of the policy. On the other hand, the complainant had submitted an application dated 03.05.2023 for getting the maturity claim under the policy. The said letter was duly replied by the branch vide registered letter on 11.05.2023 to the effect that since it is a pension plan and policy holder can opt to receive the pension with or without the commutation, but the complainant has neither responded nor submitted the documents with the office. Thus, no lump sum amount is paid in pension plan once it is matured/vested for pension. All the benefits as well as the terms and conditions are printed and available in the policy bond itself, handed over to the complainant policy holder at the commencement of the policy in the year 2011. The complainant is not entitle for any compensation, interest or costs and the amount will be paid as per the terms and conditions of the policy as the complainant herself had opted for this pension plus policy. The present complaint is not maintainable. On merits, all other allegations made in the complaint are denied and a prayer for dismissal of complaint is made.
3. Opposite Party No.2 filed written reply taking preliminary objections therein inter alia that the complaint is not maintainable as this Commission has got no jurisdiction to trey and decide the instant complaint as the policy in question is a unit linked insurance plan and the premiums of the policy holder have been invested in the market got get the desired gain. The present complaint is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed due to non-joinder of necessary parties as well as mis-joinder of the parties. The complainant has no cause of action to file the present complaint. Averred that the policy opted by the complainant is in fact a Pension Plan and no lump sum amount as claimed by the complainant is payable once it is matured/vested on 28.04.2023. On the basis of documents called by the answering opposite party, commuted value will be paid if opted for by the complainant alongwith pension after exercising the options for the same. There is no deficiency in rendering services on the part of the answering opposite party. Averred further that Smt. Indra Devi has obtained the policy after fully understanding the terms and conditions of the same and to this effect duly signed the proposal form. Further averred that no request was made by the complainant to Opposite Party no.1 through answering Opposite Party to revoke the policy and to pay the surrender value. The complainant had voluntarily paid all the premiums under the policy and the same has matured on 28.04.2023. Rs.5,16,801.77 NP was the total fund value of the policy as on 19.04.2023 but that does not mean that the amount of Rs.5,16,801.77NP is payable in lump-sum. The branch office of Opposite Party no.1 has duly written a letter dated 11.05.2023 to the complainant to the effect that the policy being a pension plan, the complainant can opt to received the pension with or without the commutation. All the benefits as well as the terms and conditions are printed and available in the policy bond itself, handed over to the complainant at the commencement of the policy in the year, 2011. The complainant is not entitled for any compensation, interest or costs and is only entitle to receive the amount as per terms and conditions of the policy. On merits all other allegations made in the complaint are denied and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint is made.
4. In order to prove her case, complainant has placed on record her affidavit Ex.C1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.C2 to Ex.C7.
5. On the other hand, ld. counsel for Opposite Party no.1 has placed on record affidavit of Sh.Ramesh Kumar, Manager Legal, LIC of India Ex.OP1/1 alongwith copies of documents Ex.OP1/2 to Ex.OP1/7. Whereas, Opposite Party No.2 has placed on record his affidavit Ex.OP2/1 alongwith copy of Aadhar Card Ex.OP2/2.
6. Ld. counsel for the complainant contended that she availed Pension Plus Policy Plan no. 803 bearing no.133338334 dated 28.04.2011 for terms of 12 years on half-yearly premium at Rs.13000/- from Opposite Party no.1. After purchasing the aforesaid policy, the complainant was regularly paying the premium to opposite party no.1. Due to financial crises, the complainant did not pay last premium amounting to Rs.13000/- which was due in October, 2022 and she humbly requested the opposite parties to revoke the said policy and made request to pay the surrender value. Thereafter, opposite party no.1 issued a notice dated 29.11.2022 to complainant and gave two options to choose, excerpts of which are as follows:
i) Revival of policy by paying arrears of premium with proper evidence of health.
or
(ii) complete withdrawal from the policy.
After receiving the abovesaid notice dated 29.11.2022, the complainant contacted with Opposite Parties and requested for complete withdrawal of money, but the Opposite Parties pressurized the complainant to revive the policy and also to pay the remaining arrears of the policy to get complete withdrawal and told that otherwise 20% amount will be deducted from the surrender value. Thereafter complainant suffered heart attack and remained in the hospital. Thereafter son of complainant contacted with Opposite Parties who told that if complainant would not pay the last premium amount in that situation 20% will be deducted from the surrender value. Then the complainant paid the last premium in the month of December, 2022 to get complete withdrawal of the amount. On 19.04.2023 the complainant alongwith his son again approached to Opposite Parties and requested them to close the policy and pay the surrender value as they are in some urgent financial need and filed an application for surrender the policy with Opposite Parties. Then Opposite Parties provided the quotation mentioning the surrender value of the policy as Rs.5,16,801.77paise alongwith questionnaire. The complainant became agree for the said surrender value and handed over all the required documents as requested by them. Thereafter on 28.04.2023 i.e. on the day when the policy gets matured, the complainant's son again visited the office of opposite parties for getting her money back, but opposite parties flatly refused to pay the amount and told her that an amount of Rs.800/- will be credited to complainant's account every month as her pension money.
7. Ld. counsel for the Opposite Parties repelled the aforesaid contention raised by complainant on the ground that as per the policy record Smt.Indra Devi has purchased the pension plus policy no.133338334 under plan term 803/12/12 with plus the age at entry 59 years, the date of commencement 28.04.2011 by paying premium of Rs.13,000/- through half yearly mode. The nominee under the policy is Sh.Dinesh Jindal, son of the policy holder. The date of maturity in this case is 28.04.2023 and the status of the policy is 'Matured'. The complainant paid all the premiums regularly except the last premium due on 10/2022, due to which a system generated discontinuous notice was sent to the policy holder on 29.11.2022 asking her to exercise one of the two options, either to opt for revival of the policy by paying the half yearly premium due on 10/2022 or for complete withdrawal from the policy. The complainant opted for the option no.1 for revival of the policy and deposited the premium on 20.12.2022 and the policy was regularized. On 19.04.2023 the policy holder enquired about the total fund value of her policy on which the pension would be payable to her. The system generated quotation showed the total value of the units as Rs.5,16,801.77NP as on 19.04.2023, which otherwise keeps on changing each day as NAV (Net Asset Value) changes with the market and so changes the number of units at a particular time. It does not mean that Rs.5,16,801.77NP is payable in lump-sum. The word surrender occurred along-with the quotation value as the system generated format for all the policies is the same, irrespective of the fact that whether the policy is capable of being surrendered or not. Neither any request was submitted by the complainant for complete withdrawal from the policy nor any document was ever submitted with Opposite Parties for the alleged pre-mature surrender of the policy. On the other hand, the complainant had submitted an application dated 03.05.2023 for getting the maturity claim under the policy. The said letter was duly replied by the branch vide registered letter on 11.05.2023 to the effect that since it is a pension plan and policy holder can opt to receive the pension with or without the commutation, but the complainant has neither responded nor submitted the documents with the office. Thus, no lump sum amount is paid in pension plan once it is matured/vested for pension.
8. We have gone through the documents/affidavits submitted by complainant and Opposite Parties and observed that complainant purchased Pension Plus Policy Plan no.803, bearing no.133338334 dated 28.04.2011 for term of 12 years on half-yearly premium at Rs. 13000/- from Opposite Party No.1, through Opposite Party No.2 (Ex.C2). If there was any doubt to the complainant about the policy, she must have availed the free look period for returning the policy, but she has not returned the policy in free look period. Hence, she accepted the terms and conditions of the policy. As per the version of the Opposite parties, complainant could not deposit the last premium which was due on 28.10.2022. Hence a notice no.80/139 dated 29.11.2022 (Ex.C3) was served to the complainant/policy holder either to choose revival of the policy by paying arrears of premium due or complete withdrawal from the policy. This fact is also not denied by the complainant. As per Ex.C4, the complainant/policy holder demanded the necessary question alongwith forms to be completed for surrender of the policy, but the policy holder did not surrender the policy and she deposited the due premium on 20.12.2022 and the policy was regularized. Perusal of the record reveals that the plan purchased by the complainant is ‘Unit Linked Deferred Pension Plan’, hence it depends on the share market. Further the policy is in fact a pension plan and no lump sum amount is payable. Perusal of the record further reveals that as per terms and conditions of the policy opposite parties issued a notice on 11.05.2023 (Ex.OP1/5) to get his option for commutation of 1/3rd of the fund value, but she had not given any option, due to which maturity value minus (Commute value) alongwith bonus is payable.
9. In view of the above discussion, the instant complaint is hereby dismissed. However, keeping in view the peculiar circumstances of the case, the parties are left to bear their own costs. Copies of the order be furnished to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to record room after compliance.
Announced on Open Commission
