COMPLAINT FILED ON:19.09.2011

DISPOSED ON:05.07.2012

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM AT BANGALORE (URBAN)

5^th DAY OF JULY 2012

       PRESENT:- SRI. B.S.REDDY                PRESIDENT                        

                          SRI.A.MUNIYAPPA                  MEMBER

O R D E R

SRI. B.S.REDDY, PRESIDENT

The complainant filed this complaint U/s. 12 of the C.P. Act of 1986 seeking direction against the Opposite Parties (herein after called as OPs) to refund the entire premium of Rs.4,03,398/- or to issue a fresh policy for the same amount under pension Plus or endowment Plus on the allegation of deficiency in service.

2.   The case of the complainant to be stated in brief is that:-

The complainant had taken 4 policies, two in the name of R.A.S.Vasan CEO and Managing Director of the Company (i.e., complainant) of policy bearing No.616149128 and 616149129 under plan 149/15 and 165/13 another two policies in the name of Director,    Smt.Rekha Vasan, policy No.616149553, plan 165/16 and Smt.Anjali Deshpande Policy No.616149025, Plan 165/16 and paying all the premiums under ECS Schemes.   Besides these policies, the complainant is holding another 3 policies and paying premiums regularly and all the policies are in force except Policy No.616149128 Plan 149/15.   Keeping in mind anticipated resources and income from the business, the complainant took these policies.   However due to unprecedented circumstances there has been a severe liquidity crunch, which has forced to discontinue the Policy No.616149128 since September-2010.   The total premium paid in respect of the said policy for the period from 28.03.2010 to 28.08.2010 a monthly premium of Rs.67,233/- total amounting to Rs.4,03,398/-.   The complainant requested OPs for cancellation of the said policy or to convert the above said policy into Endowment Plus or Pension Plus.    OP1 did not care even to acknowledge the letters dt.10.11.2010, 03.12.2010 and 10.01.2011, finally CRM, Hyderabad replied vide their letter No.12.04.2011 expressing their inability to either cancel the policy or convert it into Endowment Plus or Pension Plus Policy.   Hence this complaint seeking the relief stated above.

3. On appearance OPs filed version contending that the complainant is not entitled to the relief’s sought for in the complaint as there is no deficiency in service by Ops.   It is admitted that the complainant had taken among others Jeevan Anand (with profits) (with Accident Benefit) policy for sum assured amount of Rs.80,00,000/- from the Ops.   The date of commencement of the above policy is 28.03.2010.   The monthly premium of the policy is Rs.67,233/-.   The complainant had paid premium only for 6 months from March-2010 to August-2010 totally Rs.4,03,398/-.   He did not pay premiums due from September-2010 in respect of the said policy.   In view of non-payment of the premiums due from September-2010, the said policy is in lapsed condition from 28.09.2010.   For the letter of the complainant for cancellation of the policy OP has issued the reply on 28.05.2011.  As per policy conditions the surrender value in respect of policy is payable only when paid up value is acquired.   Paid up value in respect of the policy will acquire only when the premiums in respect of the policy are paid for minimum period of three years.   Since the complainant has paid premium only for 6 months, nothing is payable under the policy as per terms and conditions of the policy.   As such the amount cannot be used for issue of fresh policy also.    The complainant instead of applying for revival of the above policy, he has filed this complaint on all false grounds.   The policy is lapsed condition the complainant has not taken necessary steps for revival of the policy although an opportunity was given to him for revival of the policy as per letter dt.28.05.2011.  Hence, it is prayed to dismiss the complaint with exemplary costs.

4. The complainant in order to substantiate complaint averments filed affidavit evidence.   The Manager (Legal and HPF) of the OPs filed affidavit evidence in support of the defence version. 

5. The OPs filed Written Arguments,

6. Arguments on both sides heard.

7.   The points now that arise for our consideration in this complaint are as under:

Point No.1:-Whether the complainant has proved the deficiency in service on the part of the OPs?

           Point No.2:-If so, whether the complainant is entitled for the relief’s now claimed?

           Point No.3:-To What order?

8.   We record our findings on the above points:

           Point No.1:-Negative

   Point No.2:-Negative

   Point No.3:-As per final order.

R E A S O N S

9.   At the outset is not at dispute that the complainant had taken among others Jeevan Anand (With Profits) (With Accident Benefit) policy for sum assured amount of Rs.80,00,000/- from the Ops.   The policy number being 616149128 Plan 149/15 the date of commencement of the policy is 28.03.2010 the monthly premium of Rs.67,233/-  was payable on 28^th of every month in respect of the said policy.   The complainant had paid premium for 6 months from March-2010 to August-2010 totally amounting to Rs.4,03,398/-.    The complainant could not pay premiums due from September-2010 in respect of the said policy, in view of the same the policy is in lapsed condition from 28.09.2010.

10.   The complainant is seeking refund of the entire premium amount of Rs.4,03,398/- paid against the said policy or to issue fresh policy for the same amount under Pension Plus or Endowment Plus.   For the letter dt.24.05.2011 of the complainant OP has issued the reply dt.28.05.2011 as per document No.2 expressing its inability to comply the demand of the complainant either for refund or for issuance of fresh policy but the complainant was informed to seek for revival of the policy under special revival scheme.   OP has produced the copy of the said policy.   As per Clause-7 of the policy, the policy can be surrendered for cash after the premiums have been paid for at least three years.   The minimum surrender value allowable under this policy is equal to 30 %of the total amount of the within mentioned premiums paid excluding the premiums for the first year and all extra premiums if any, and or additional premiums for Accident Benefit that may have been paid.   The cash value of any existing vested bonus will also be allowed.    Clause-4 of the policy provides Non-Forfeiture Regulations: the complainant should have paid premium for 3 years for seeking for paid up value.   Thus it becomes clear that the complainant has not complied with the terms and conditions of the policy.   In view of the same,   Ops are justified in not allowing the refund of the amount of premium paid or to issue fresh policy for the said amount.   Merely because the complainant has taken other policies and paying huge premiums, Ops cannot be directed to refund the premium amounts paid in respect of the policy which is in a lapsed condition.   Under these circumstances, we are of the view that the complainant failed to prove deficiency in service on the part of the Ops.   The complaint is devoid of merits, the same is liable to be dismissed.     Accordingly we proceed to pass the following:

O R D E R

The complaint filed by the complainant dismissed.   Considering the nature of dispute no order as to costs.  

        Send copy of this order to both the parties free of costs.

(Dictated to the Stenographer and typed in the computer and transcribed by her, verified and corrected, and then pronounced in the Open Court by us on this the 5^th DAY of JULY-2012.)

MEMBER                                                         PRESIDENT

Cs.