1. A dispute has broken out in between the Insurer (OP) and the Insured (Complainant) over an Insurance Policy being No. 422425538, dated 28.03.2001. It was Jiban Suraksha Policy. For this the complainant made one-time payment of Rs. 10,000/- on 26.03.2021. The proposal form was signed by the complainant on 26.03.2001 and Policy Certificate was issued on 28.03.2001. The policy attained maturity on 28.03.2020 -after lapse of 19 years. But discrepancy has surfaced in between the proposal form and the policy certificate as to the amount of monthly annuity payable after maturity. As per proposal form, it is Rs. 416/- per month and as reflected in the policy certificate it is Rs. 6,207/-. Again, the certificate bears a stipulation that one time payment of Rs. 6 38,561/- would be made after the death of the insured to his legal heirs; whereas the proposal form does not contain any such condition. 

2. According to the complainant, the OP has declined to release monthly annuity @ Rs. 6,207/- per month after 28.03.2020, for which this case has been filed on 25.11.2020 seeking direction for payment of annuity for the period from April, 2020 to October, 2020 and for release of Rs. 6,38,561/- (Rupees six lakh thirty eight thousand five hundred sixty one) after his death to his legal heirs pursuant to the policy certificate. He has additionally prayed for compensation of Rs. 50,000/- and litigation cost of Rs. 30,000/-.

3. The Op has contested the case by filing written version on 18.02.2021. It has denied by filing the WV the liability for payment of annuity @ Rs. 6,207/- per month and conceded to its liability for payment  @ Rs. 416/- per month. The written version further states that there was computation error in preparation of the Insurance Certificate. 

4. According to the contention of the Ld. Advocate of the complainant the Insurance Certificate will prevail over the proposal form in so far as it relates to the amount of annuity also to the condition for payment of lump sum amount after the death of the insured. It is the contention of the Ld. Advocate of the OP that the proposal form which is dotted with the complainant and the agent of the insurer is the document for insurance contract and they signed the same after knowing full well that the monthly annuity would be Rs. 416/- per month and nothing would be payable after the death of the insured.

5. We should bear in our mind that insurance is an agreement between the insured and the insurer and this agreement is based on the information that the insured provide in the proposal form. Hence, this form becomes the single most important document. Again, in any contract the consideration may be inadequate who must not be insufficient. In this particular case of insurance contract the OP received only Rs. 10,000/- as a consideration for the policy to pay annuity after gap of 19 years. Rs. 10000/- is grossly insufficient as consideration for payment of annuity @ Rs. 6,207/- after gap of 19 years and also for payment of Rs. 638561 after the death of the insured. On the other hand, the said amount is surely adequate as well as sufficient consideration for paymant of such annuity @ Rs. 416. From this legal point of view the proposal form prevails over the insurance certificate. Such being the position the contention of the Ld Advocate of the OP seems to be more impressive.

6. It is well settled that proposal form is the most important and basic document required for Life Insurance Contract. According to the contention canvassed by the Ld. Advocate of the Op due to computation error or typographical error. Rs. 6,207/- could somehow find place in the Insurance Certificate although the annuity payable, as recorded in the proposal form, was Rs. 416/-. He has also contended that such error as appearing in the certificate should be ignored. According to him none of the insurance company will sell insurance policy at Rs. 10,000/- for giving monthly annuity @ more than Rs. 1,000/- after gap of specific period also for making onetime payment of such a huge amount after the death of the insured.

7. Knowing full well about the terms and conditions as set out therein the complainant signed the proposal form. That means, after knowing and realizing that he would get only annuity @ 416/- per month and would get nothing after his death the complainant made the agreement with the insurance company. Now he is barred by the principle of estoppel from making assertion that he is entitled to monthly annuity @ Rs. 6,207/- and also to payment of lump sum amount after his death. There can not be any doubt that in case of any insurance contract insurance certificate is issued basing upon the proposal form. But unjustly discrepancy in between them has surfaced and such discrepancy has resulted from mistake or inadvertence in preparing the insurance certificate. As to the quantum of annuity and the condition for one time payment after his death of the insured the proposal form is more reliable and acceptable document. After placing reliance thereupon we find that the monthly annuity payable to the complainant was Rs. 416/- per month and that nothing is payable after his death.  .

8. The case is there disposed of with the following direction :-

1. The OP will pay to the complainant arrears of annuity with effect from 01.04.2020 @ 416/- per month in favour of the complainant within a period of 45 days hence, failing which the amount will accrue interest @ 10% per annum.

2. There will be no order as to compensation and cost.

Let a plain copy be given to the parties free of cost as per CPR.

Dictated and corrected by

[HON'BLE MR. Lakshmi Kanta Das]
PRESIDENT