Delhi

New Delhi

CC/767/2010

Lalit Mohan Madhan - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S. Aviva Life Insurance Company Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

07 Jun 2019

ORDER

 

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-VI

(DISTT. NEW DELHI),

 ‘M’ BLOCK, 1^STFLOOR, VIKAS BHAWAN, I.P.ESTATE,

                                       NEW DELHI-110001

 

    Case No.C.C.767/2010                                                                Dated:

    In the matter of:

Lalit Mohan Madhan     

S/o Sh. D.D. Madhan

Having his office at

B-26-27, Community Centre

                Janakpuri, New Delhi-110058                                                                                          ……..COMPLAINANT

 

VERSUS

 

1. Aviva Life  Insurance Co.India Pvt. Ltd.

     Regd.  Office 2^nd Floor, Prakash Deep Building,

     7, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi-110001.

 

2. HDFC bank

H Block, Connaught Place

New Delhi

 

……..OPPOSITE PARTIES

              

NIPUR CHANDNA, MEMBER

ORDER

      

1. The complainant has filed the present complaint against the OP under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986.  The gist of the complaint is that the complainant availed loan against the property from OP-2. It is alleged that while granting the loan, it was informed to him that as a condition precedent for availing the LAP( Loan Against Policy) he had to take insurance policy covering the risk of the loan disbursed to him by OP-2. The complainant was asked by OP-2 to sign two blanks unfilled form for the issuance of insurance policy in question. No pamphlet / brochure or terms and condition were ever provided to him at the time of disbursement of loan. Having no other option, the complainant signed the blank form as asked by OP-2. Two life Insurance Policies bearing no. WLG1360310 and WLG1326435 were issued to him at annual premium of Rs. 2lacs each. While disbursing the loan a sum of Rs. 4 lacs was deducted by OP-2 against the policy issued by OP-1. The complainant was given the assurance that after the repayment of entire loan or after the payment of  premium for three years he had a right to surrender the policy in question and the entire amount of the premium alongwith accrued benefit would be refunded to him. It is alleged that the complainant repaid the entire loan in January,2008 to OP-2 and approach OP-1 for surrender of the two policies in question but OP-1 refuses to entertain the surrender request and asked him to pay premium for one more year. The  complainant sent legal notice dated 03/04/2010 to OP-1 thereby calling upon it to accept the surrender request and refund the policy amount , but all in vain. Complainant, therefore approach this Forum for redressal of his grievance.
2. Complaint has been contested by both the OPs.  In its written statement OP-1 has not disputed that two policies referred above were issued to the complainant It has been pleaded that after the expiry of  4 years, on 03/04/2010, the complainant submitted a duly signed Surrender Request Form to the OP Co. with the request that the entire amount of the premium alongwith accrued benefit be released to him. It is further pleaded that the proposal form for the polices in question was submitted on 29/08/2006 and 05/10/2006, respectively. It has been stated that the policy terms and conditions specifically provides for a Free Look Period of 15 days, during which period the policy owner is entitled to review the policy terms and conditions and request for a cancellation,  if dissatisfied with the terms and conditions of the policy. The complainant failed to exercise his right and approach OP for surrender of the policy after a lapse of 4 year in June, 2010, hence the claim is barred by limitation and be dismissed on the sole ground.
3. In its written statement OP-2 denied any deficiency in service on its part and further stated that the present complaint is liable to be dismiss qua OP-2 for the reason that the complainant has not sought any relief from OP-2.
4. Complainant has filed his evidence by way of affidavit wherein he has corroborated the contents of his complaint.  On the other hand,  both the OPs filed their evidence by way of Affidavits.  
5. We have heard argument advance at the Bar and have perused the record.
6. OP has strongly challenged the issue of limitation, hence need to be decided first. The complainant had filed an application for surrender of policy in the year 2010 with OP. The OP neither rejected the request nor had complied with the same, hence, in our view the cause of action for filing the present complaint, if any, arose in the year 2010 and the complainant has filed the present complaint on 04/06/2010 well within the limitation period, hence, the objection of the OP regarding the limitation is rejected.
7.  Some facts are not disputed by the parties such as the policy documents, payment of premiums and the request surrender of policy on behalf of complainant. The OP had placed on record the copy of standard terms and conditions of the polices in question. Article 14- surrender value clause 14.1 of the policy terms and conditions states as under:-

“Subject to Article 17, with effect from the commencement of the fourth policy year the policyholder is entitled to receive a surrender value upon termination of the policy, (other than the death of the insured) provided that all Regular Premium due have been paid for at least two full policy years.” 

8. Admittedly, the complainant received the policy in the year 2006.  He has also paid three premium against the policies in question. As per clause 14.1 of the policy terms and conditions reproduced above, the complainant is entitled for the surrender value.  The complainant sent a surrender request to the OP vide letter dated 03/04/2010.  OP failed to respond to the request made by the complainant. OP ought to have accepted the request of surrender of the policy as per the policy terms and conditions, which it fails to do so. This amounts to deficiency in services on the part of the OP.

 

9. We, therefore, hold OP guilty of deficiency in service and direct it as under:-

i).  Pay to the complainant the surrender value of the policies in question  along with interest @  9% p.a. from the date of institution of this complaint i.e.  04.06.2010  till payment.

ii)  Pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.10,000/- as compensation towards harassment, mental agony and pain.

 

ii)  Pay to the complainant a sum of Rs.10,000/- as litigation cost.

 

 

10. The order shall be complied within 30 days of the receipt of the copy of the order. If the said amount is not paid by the OP within a period of one month from the date of receipt of this order, the same shall be recovered by the complainant along with simple interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date of this order till recovery of the said amount. A copy each of this order each be sent to both parties free of cost by post. Orders be also sent to www.confonet.nic.in. File be consigned to record room.

Pronounced in open Forum on 

 

                               (ARUN KUMAR ARYA)

                                         PRESIDENT

(NIPUR CHANDNA)                                         (H M VYAS)

       MEMBER                                                     MEMBER