Shri B. Mukhopadhyay, President. This is an application u/s.12 of the C.P. Act, 1986. Complainant by filing this compliant has submitted that the complainant approached the OP1(LICI) on 09-11-2010 with a request for sanctioning the loan against his LICI Policies bearing No.415842281 and 418586355. When the dealing staff of OP1 asked the complainant to renew the said policies first and also demanded lot of paperwork including KYC from the complainant. But as because the complainant was in urgent need of money, he wanted to surrender his said LICI Policies without entering into any complications in getting sanctioned of any loan. Accordingly, complainant surrendered his LICI policies with the expectation of due payment of the surrendered values in respect of the LICI policies to the tune of Rs.22673/- and Rs.18,743/- respectively. But however, on 01-12-2010 the complainant was shocked to receive cheques for amounts of Rs.18,465/- and Rs.14,418/- only from the OP1 which were much lower than the actual surrender values of the LICI policies as per the quotations of the OPs and fact remains without assigning any reason the OPs unilaterally deducted a sum of Rs.8,533/- from the actual amount payable to him. Thereafter, complainant attended many times to get rectification of such anomalies and for getting back deducted amount of Rs.8,533/- from LICI but LICI Authority did nothing but their act is unethical, illegal, unfair and practically complainant has been cheated by the OPs and in the above situation the present complaint is filed for redressal. On the other hand, the LICI Authority has submitted that no doubt the complainant had two LICI Policies having separate numbers 418586355 and 418542281 and both lapsed in the month of July, 2009 and in September, 2009 respectively and both the policies remained in lapse condition due to non-payment of premium. It is also admitted by the OPs 1 and 2 that complainant approached for loan against the security of two policies on 09-11-2010 when both the policies were found in lapsed condition and same were not revived. But the dealing staff of the OP rightly told the complainant to renew both the polices because loan cannot be granted against lapsed policies and also rightly asked him to file KYC as it is mandatory on the part of the customer to submit the same. It is further alleged that the complainant approached for loan so the OP issued loan-cum-revival quotation which will be evident as per Annexure – B but complainant wrongly stated that Rs.22,673/- and Rs.18,743/- were payable as surrender value but it is not a fact because surrendered value of Rs.22,673/- and Rs.18,743.- would be released subject to regularization and revival of the lapsed policy but anyhow complainant did not disclose that fact and falsely filed this complaint only relying upon the quotation as supplied by the department. But the surrender value as calculated against both the lapsed policies as per rules and regulation are correct and it was rightly delivered to the complainant so there is no question of refunding any further amount and for which the present complaint should be dismissed. Decision with Reasons On comparative and comprehensive study of the vital document of the complainant Annexure B on the basis of which complainant has appeared before this Forum for getting relief and no doubt the OP has relied upon that, so we are convinced to hold upon the vital document the Annexure – B, loan quotation we shall have to proceed for final decision. Practically, after considering loan quotation it is found that on the date of issue of loan quotation the policy was lapsed but in the said loan quotation it is specifically noted that up to 2009 July and September, no premium was paid by the complainant so it is mentioned in the loan quotation that total premium is required to be recovered that amount was Rs.4,956/- along with late fee required 304 and total deduction Rs.5,260/- that means it is specifically mentioned in the loan quotation that after recovery of the arrear premiums surrendered value of the policy would be Rs.18,743/- and Rs.22,673/- and it is specifically mentioned there and knowing fully well about that fact that he did not proceed to get loan but keeping that loan quotation in his pocket without ventilating later part of the loan quotation “the heading deduction” and without disclosing that before this Forum this complaint is filed to get entire surrender value of the two policies and it is the conduct of the complainant and no doubt the complainant is a greedy person who wanted to hallucinate this Forum and to get relief but anyhow OP has relied upon that document and pointed out the vital head deduction etc. that was not ventilated in the complaint not even whispered that the policies were lapsed policies. Fact remains policies were lapsed since July and September, 2009 respectively and it was not revived or the arrear premiums were not paid then how the complainant claim total value of the insurance policies when both the policies were found lapsed. Unfortunately it is an uncalled for complaint and practically such an act of the complainant is condemnable. Practically the complainant should be penalized for filing false, fabricated complaint against the OP and the entire case is full of fabricated, concocted, unwarranted, illegal and uncalled for on the ground that the complainant has ventilated this story of loan quotation that is a portion of the loan quotation without whispering about the deduction and another factor is that loan quotation does not support the complainant but on the other hand the loan quotation paper Annexure-B has confirmed that the present complainant/consumer has appeared before this forum to squeeze money and payment as made by the OPs against lapsed policies are quite correct and it is duly accepted by the complainant so there is no question of any sort of relief rather complainant should be penalized for that. In this situation the complaint fails as it is frivolous, vexations and fabricated. Hence, Ordered That the complaint be and the same is dismissed on contest against the contesting OP subject to payment of a sum of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five thousand only) to the OPs1 and 2 by the complainant on that ground it is frivolous, vexatious and fabricated one.
| | [HON'ABLE MR. A. K. CHANDA] MEMBER[HON'ABLE MR. B. MUKHOPADHYAY] PRESIDENT[HON'ABLE MRS. SANGITA PAL] MEMBER | | 
