IN THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, MURSHIDABAD AT BERHAMPORE.
CASE No.CC 162/2016. .
Date of Filing: 16.11.2016. Date of Final Order: 01.12.2017.
Complainant: Asesh Kumar Misra, C/O Shib Chandra Bhadury, 82 A.C. Road, P.O.Khagra,
P.S. Berhampore Town, Dist. Murshidabad, Pin 742103.
-Vs-
Opposite Party: Manager, Max Life Insurance Co. Ltd, of La Vida Mall, 2nd Floor, CK-III,
Sector-II, Nr. Tank No. 9, Salt Lake City, Kolkata 700091.
Present: Sri Anupam Bhattacharyya …………………. President.
Smt. Chandrima Chakraborty ………………. Member.
Sri Manas Kumar Mukherjee …………………….. Member.
FINAL ORDER
Sri Anupam Bhattacharyya- President.
The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant U/S 12 of C. P. Act, 1986 praying for payment of surrender value of the two policies for Rs.33,211.44 each and compensation of Rs.20,000/- for deficiency in service and harassment.
The complainant’s case, in brief, is that the complainant took two policies on 30.07.10 paying Rs.50,000/- and Rs.49,999/- to OP-Insurance executed at Berhampore being influenced at the proposal of the agent Mrs. Sabila Nazzim of OP-Company on July, 2011 getting letter the complainant went to the office of the OP and found that the office has been shifted. The OP never informed the complainant about shifting of their office and also the name how to pay the next premium as a result those two policies were lapsed in the year 2011 and the same were terminated being not received. In the year 2013 the complainant was transferred and posted at PNB, Berhampore but he did not found the office of the OP. In the year 2016 he got the address of the OP and then he surrendered the said two policies by registered post on 08.01.2016 but the OP repudiated the same on the ground that the same had no cash values at the relevant time. The shifting of the office of the OP without intimation, for which the policies were lapsed for non-payment of premium, is deficiency in service and for that the complainant is entitled to get surrendered value along with compensation. Hence, the instant complainant case.
The written version filed by the OP-Insurance policy, in brief, is that the OP has categorically denied the allegations of the complainant. The case is barred by Limitation being the cause of action to be calculated from the d ate of last premium paid in the year 2010 and the instant complaint filed on 16.11.16 after six years. Also, the instant policy being unit linked policy is a speculative investment which does not come under C.P. Act and for that the complainant is not a consumer and as such the case is not maintainable. The complainant voluntarily applied for the impugned two policies for 20 years understanding the terms and conditions. The complainant did not cancel the policies within the free look period. Accordingly, the legally valid contract was conducted between the parties. The complainant paid only 1st premium and failed to remit the 2nd premium resulting lapse of policy. The policy lapse intimation dt. 04.09.2011 was sent to the complainant. The complainant did not contact the OP at any point of time. The complainant is holding a responsible position. He could easily make on-line payment of premium. The complainant is not entitled to get any relief and for that the case is liable to be dismissed. Hence, the instant written version.
Considering the pleadings of both parties the following points have been raised for the disposal of the case.
Points for Decision
- Whether the complaint is maintainable in present form and in law?
- Whether the complaint is barred by Law of Limitation?
- Whether the complainant is a consumer under the ambit of C. P. Act, 1986?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get relief as prayed for?
- To what other relief/reliefs the complainant is entitled to get?
Decision with Reasons.
Point Nos. 1 to 5.
All the points are taken up together for the sake of convenience.
The Instant complaint is for payment of surrender value of the two policies for Rs.33, 211.44 each and compensation of Rs.20, 000/- for deficiency in service and harassment.
The complainant’s main case is for refund of surrender value of the 1st premium paid being lapsed for the shifting of the office of the OP without intimation.
On the other hand, the OP has denied the allegation of the complainant categorically. The complainant being bank employee with responsible position he got the policy voluntarily understanding the terms and conditions of the policy and he could easily make payment of the second premium by other means but he has not paid the same and for that he is not entitled to get any relief.
To prove the case in this particular case both the complainant and OP have filed evidence –on-affidavit separately along with relevant documents in support of both the respective parties.
Admittedly, the complainant is a bank employee with responsible position.
It is also admitted that the impugned two policies are unit linked policies and that only initial premium was paid where the policies were for 20 years and that the complainant has not availed the privilege of cancellation of policies during free look period.
The complainant surrendered the polices on 08.01.2016 long after lapse of those polices duly intimated by OP by letter d t. 04.09.2011.
In this case OP-Insurance Company has sent letter dated 19.01.2016 regarding surrender of policy to the complainant informing that the policy does not acquire any cash value and the same was lapsed since 03.8.2011 and as per terms and conditions, the policy cannot be revived.
Where the two separate statements of A/c dt. 31.07.11 and 03.8.11 in respect of policy No.769789207 and 769776907 respectively with closing balance of Rs.33, 211.34 and Rs.32619.96 respectively were sent to the complaint by the OP-Insurance Company.
Now, in this complaint the complainant has only prayed for refund of the value of unit link policy as on 30.7.11 and 02.08.11 respectively.
But, the same has been challenged by the OP-Insurance Company raising objection on several grounds such as on the point of maintainability that the impugned policy being unit link policy is a speculative investment and for that the same will not come under C. P. Act, and also barred by limitation.
Regarding barred by limitation we can safely conclude that the case is snot barred by limitation relying upon the letter of OP dt. 19.01.2016 with the intimation of no cash value of the policy.
The instant case, to our mind, should be considered in a simple manner, not in a critical manner that the complainant’s policy was lapsed being not continued where only initial premium was paid with unit link policy depending on NAV value and now prayed for return of the said NAV value as per statement of A/C issued by OP-Insurance Company as on 30.7.11 and 02.8.11 as per their letter dt. 31.7.11 and 03.8.11 respectively.
According to settled principles on the ground of defect with technicalities the claimant should not be deprived.
On the basis of above discussions we find that all the points are disposed of in favour of the complainant in part and as such the complainant is entitled to get the market value of the impugned lapsed policies as on 30.7.2011 and 02.8.11 for Rs.33211.34 plus Rs33619.96 respectively and making round off the same will be Rs.33210/- + Rs.33620/- totaling to Rs.66, 830/- along with interest @7% p.a from the date of filing of the case till realization.
Hence,
Ordered
That the Consumer Complaint No . 162/2016 be and the same is hereby allowed on contest but in part.
The complainant is entitled to get the market value of the impugned lapsed policies as on 30.7.2011 and 02.8.11 for Rs.33211.34 plus Rs33619.96 respectively and making round off the same will be Rs.33210/- + Rs.33620/- totaling to Rs.66, 830/- along with interest @7% p.a from the date of filing of the case till realization.
The OP –Insurance Company is directed to pay Rs.66, 830/- along with interest @7% pa. from the date of filing of the case till realization to the complainant within 60 days from the date of this order, failing which the OP is to pay @Rs.50/- per day’s delay as fine and the amount so accumulated shall be deposited in the Consumer Legal Aid Account by D.D.
Let a plain copy of this order be made available and be supplied free of cost, to each of the parties on contest in person, Ld. Advocate/Agent on record, by hand under proper acknowledgment / be sent forthwith under ordinary post to the concerned parties as per rules, for information and necessary action.
