Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/455/2012

Charanjeet Lal - Complainant(s)

Versus

State BAnk Of India - Opp.Party(s)

M.C. Gupta

26 Apr 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA NAGAR

                                                                                    Complaint No. 455 of 2012

                                                                                    Date of institution: 10.05.2012    

                                                                                    Date of decision: 26.04.2017

Charanjeet Lal aged about 65 years resident of H. No. 1131/1, Guru Arjun Nagar, Jagadhri, Tehsil Jagadhri, Distt. Yamuna Nagar.

   

       …Complainant.

                                                     Versus

1. State Bank of India through its Branch Manager, Railway Road, Yamuna Nagar.
2. SBI Life Insurance through its Branch manager, near HUDA Office, Sector-17, Jagadhri.

                                                                                                …Respondents.                                       

 

BEFORE: SH. ASHOK KUMAR GARG…………….. PRESIDENT.

                 SH. S.C.SHARMA………………………….MEMBER.

                 SMT. VEENA RANI SHEOKAND………..MEMBER

 

Present:    Sh. M.C. Gupta, Advocate, counsel for complainant.  

                 Sh. P.K.Kashyap, Advocate, counsel for respondent No.1. 

                 Sh. Brijesh Chauhan, Advocate, counsel for respondent No.2.     

 

ORDER

 

1.                     The present complaint has been filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986.

2.                     Brief facts of the present complaint, as alleged by the complainant, are that complainant obtained a house loan to the tune of Rs. 43,68,632/- from the respondent No.1 Bank (hereinafter respondents will be referred as OPs) on 26.10.2009 which was repayable in 20 years. At the time of taking the loan, the OP No.1 Bank insured the house of the complainant through Op No.2 Insurance Company to ensure security of repayment of their loan for which a premium of Rs. 1,43,632/- was taken from the complainant through cheque and the said insurance started from 11.02.2010. It has been further mentioned that the complainant had repaid the entire loan to the OP No.1 on 17.11.2011 and also surrendered the insurance policy against the said loan on the same day to the Op No.2 and asked them to pay the balance premium amount. On that day, the official of OP No.2 told to the complainant that an approximate sum of Rs. 1,30,000/- will be refunded to the complainant, however, later on an amount of Rs. 49,845/- instead of Rs. 1,30,000/- was paid through cheque on 13.04.2012 to the complainant which constitute the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. Lastly, prayed for directing the OP No.2 Insurance Company to refund the balance amount of Rs. 80,155/- alongwith interest and also to pay compensation as well as liigation expenses. Hence this complaint.

3.                     Upon notice, OPs appeared and filed their written statement separately. OP No.1 Bank filed its written statement besides preliminary objections stated on merit that all the allegations have been leveled against the OP No.2 Insurance Company and relief has also been sought from the OP No.2. Hence, there is no deficiency in service or negligence on the part of Op No.1 and lastly prayed for dismissal of complaint qua OP No.1 Bank.

4.                     OP No.2 insurance company filed its written statement besides some preliminary objections, it has been stated on merit that life assured Sh. Pardeep Kumar obtained a group insurance scheme under master policy bearing No. 39000000105 issued to the State Bank of India through membership Form No. 93720410 dated 28.10.2009. The risk commenced on 11.02.2010 for a sum insured of Rs. 43,68,632/- at inception. In the membership form, the policy holder had declared under question No.6 that “ I would like to become a member of SBI Life Dhanraksha Plus LPPT Group Insurance Scheme for borrowers of the Master Policy holder….. I agree to abide by the terms and conditions of the Scheme and join the scheme for Life Insurance Cover for the duration of the loan as per the prevailing EMI Schedule.” It has been further mentioned that as per schedule No.III, clause 6- surrender of the Master Policy which reads as, “A member may choose to surrender his or her insurance cover for the surrender value at any point of time from the start of cover, provided the cover is in force, by making a request in writing. The surrender value will be calculated as under:

Cover Term	Surrender Value Amount.
Year 1 Onwards	45% of the Premiums paid less taxes) x (Unexpired term/ total term)x ( sum Assured benefit at the time of surrender/sum Assured at inception) Rs. 49, 845/- (45% of Rs. 1,30,218)* (214/240)* (Rs.41,67,593/- Rs. 43,68,632)= 49,845/-.

 

            It has been further mentioned that as per above noted terms and conditions the surrender value was paid in accordance with the clause No.6 of the Schedule III of the policy, an amount of Rs. 49, 845/- (45% of Rs. 1,30,218)* (214/240)* (Rs.41,67,593/- Rs. 43,68,632)= 49,845/-  was paid to the policy holder vide cheque No. 435978 dated 21.03.2012, which was duly admitted by the complainant. Rest contents of the complaint has been denied being wrong and incorrect for want of knowledge and matter of record. Lastly, prayed for dismissal of complaint.

5.                     To prove the case, counsel for the complainant tendered into evidence short affidavit of the complainant as Annexure CX and documents such as photo copy of quotation for surrender value as Annexure C-1, Photo copy of account statement of SBI Bank as Annexure C-2 and C-3 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant.

6.                     On the other hand, counsel for Op No.1 tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh. Suresh Chander Sharma, Asstt. General Manager SBI as Annexure RW/A and closed the evidence on behalf of OP No.1.

7.                     Learned counsel for the Op No.2 tendered into evidence affidavit of V. Srinivas as Annexure RW2/X and documents such as photo copy of terms and conditions of Insurance Policy as Annexure R2/1, Photo copy of proposal form as Annexure R2/2, Photo copy of premium receipt as Annexure R2/3, Photo copy of refund service as Annexure R2/4, Photo copy of forwarding letter for sending the cheque of refund dated 23.03.2012 as Annexure R2/5 and closed the evidence on behalf of OP No.2.

8.                     We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and have gone through the pleadings as well as documents placed on file very minutely and carefully.

9.                     The only version of the complainant is that at the time of taking loan from the OP No.1 Bank, OP No.2 Insurance Company issued an insurance policy through Op No.1 Bank to cover the risk of house loan of the complainant and charged premium of Rs. 1,43,632/- from the complainant. The said loan was repayable in 20 years but the complainant repaid the entire loan of the OP No.1 Bank on 17.11.2011 and also surrendered the insurance policy in question to the Op No.2 and asked them to repay the balance premium amount but the OP No.2 Insurance Company refunded only Rs. 49845/- on 13.04.2012 instead of Rs. 1,30,000/- which constitute the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs.

10.                   On the other hand, learned counsel for the OP No.2 Insurance Company argued at length that as per terms and conditions of the Insurance policy, an amount of Rs. 49,845/- has been repaid to the complainant/policy holder vide cheque No. 435978 dated 21.03.2012 and the same was duly accepted by the complainant. Learned counsel for Op No.2 Insurance Company draw our attention towards the insurance policy Annexure R2/1 and argued that as per clause 6 of the schedule III under the head surrender value it has been specifically mentioned that if the insurance policy holder make a request to surrender the policy onward after 1 year then the surrender value will be calculated as Rs. 49, 845/- (45% of Rs. 1,30,218)* (214/240)* (Rs.41,67,593/- Rs. 43,68,632)= 49,845/- and the same will be refunded to the policy holder and accordingly the same surrender value had already been refunded to the complainant but the complainant has filed the present complaint just to harass and humiliate the OP No.2 Insurance Company after a period of 2-3 months and requested for dismissal of complaint and referred the case law titled as United India Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Subhash Chandra, Revision Petition No. 469/2006 decided on 19.05.2010 and another case titled as General Assurance Society Limited Versus Chandumall Jain & Another, 1966 (3) SCR page 500.

11                    After hearing both the parties, we are of the considered view that there is no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on the part of OP Insurance Company as the complainant has totally failed to convince this Forum that in what manner he was entitled to get the refund of the entire premium of Rs. 1,30,000/- as alleged in the complaint from the OP Insurance Company. We have perused the insurance policy Annexure R2/1 and as per clause 6 of the Schedule III the surrender value amounting to Rs. 49,845/- has been correctly refunded to the complainant. The complainant has totally failed to controvert the calculation made by the OP No.2 Insurance Company in refunding the proportionate amount of the premium as per terms and conditions of the insurance policy. It is settled law that insurance policy is a contract between the parties and both the parties are bound its terms and conditions. The complainant has totally failed to convince this Forum that there was any negligence on the part of OP Insurance Company in calculating the refund of premium as per terms and conditions of the insurance policy in question.

12.                   Resultantly, in view of the law referred above and in the circumstances noted above, we are of the considered view that there is no merit in the present complaint and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. Copies of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs as per rules. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced in open court 26.04.2017.

                                                                                    (ASHOK KUMAR GARG )

                                                                                    PRESIDENT,

                                                                                   

 

                        (VEENA RANI SHEOKAND)         (S.C.SHARMA )

                         MEMBER                                         MEMBER.