15.03.2023
ORDER ON ADMISSION
BY SRI RAVI SHANKAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
The Appellant/Complainant preferred this appeal being aggrieved by the Order dt.06.09.2022 passed in CC.No.4/2019 on the file of Dakshina Kannada District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mangalore which directed this OPs to pay a sum of Rs.9,767/- to the complainant along with interest at the rate of interest 8% p.a from the date of filing of this complainant along with compensation of Rs. 10,000/- and costs.
2. The complainant submits that she had obtained Life Insurance policy from the OP/ Respondent for an assured amount of Rs.3,00,000/- and annual premium is Rs.10,000/-. She had paid four annual premiums and after payment of said four premiums, she noticed the value of fund amounted Rs.15,515=92/-. When she enquired with respect to the said value to OP/Respondent, they had not properly answered and simply told that the market is very low and it shows the value is only that much for which the complainant decided to withdraw and not to continue the said policy from the OP she wrote a letter for surrender of the policy and to pay the premium amount paid towards a policy for which the OP wrote a letter dated 25.11.2017 and enclosed a cheque bearing No.968965 for Rs.9,767/- drawn on Axis Bank through speed post on 12.07.2017. Noticing the said lesser amount, the complainant requested the respondent to furnish the statement of Accounts and also objected for the payment of meagre amount and insisted for payment of entire amount of Rs.40,000/- which was paid towards premium. The OP/Respondent declined to pay the said amount and aggrieved by the same, the complainant filed a complaint before District Commission alleging deficiency in service and sought for the payment of the entire premium amount paid by the complainant.
3. After trial, the District Commission allowed the complaint and directed the OPs to pay the above said meagre amount to the complainant. In fact she is entitled to get entire premium amount paid, but, the District Commission without considering the complainant’s allegation had allowed with directions to pay said amount which she requires for modifications by setting aside the Order passed by the District Commission and prays for payment of entire premium amount paid. Heard on admission.
4. On going through the memorandum of appeal, certified copy of the impugned order passed by the District Commission, there is no dispute that the complainant obtained unit linked Life Insurance Policy from the respondents for an assured amount of 3,00,000/- and it is also not in dispute that an amount of Rs.40,000/- was paid by complainant for four continuous years as yearly premium. After payment of the said four premiums, the complainant noticed the value of unit were decreased to Rs.15,515=92 and thought for surrender of the policy and requested the Respondents to pay the surrender value of the policy. After receipt of the said requisition, the Respondents have sent a cheque bearing No.968965 for Rs.9,767/-, but, the appellant not satisfied with the said amount, hence, filed a complaint before the District Commission alleging deficiency in service. After trial, the District Commission allowed the complaint and directed the Respondent to pay the surrender value of the policy amounting to Rs.9,767/- . The order passed by the District Commission according to us is in accordance with law. The amount which was paid by the Complainant towards premium is to be transferred to the policy not only towards units it also covers the risks towards the health of the appellant when she sought for surrender value of the premium. The respondents as per terms and conditions of the policy deducted certain amount stated below:
Remarks | | Amount |
Lapse withdrawal amount | | Rs.36,412.76 |
Surrender policy is 100% of FY r’s allocated premium | | Rs.28,500 |
Foreciose amount paid (lapse withdrawal amount-Surrender penalty is 100% FY r’s allocated premium) | | Rs.7,912.76 |
As per exhibit this is aligned and prepared to pay the amount of Rs.9,767/-. When the amount was deducted towards covering the risk of the health of the appellant, the appellant is not entitled to get entire premium amount paid by her. We do not find any irregularity in order passed by the District Commission. No interference is required. Hence, the following;
ORDER
The appeal is dismissed.
Sd/- Sd/-
MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
PS*
