Karnataka

Bangalore 4th Additional

CC/16/214

Mrs. Shabana,W/o Mr. Babu, - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Co. Ltd., - Opp.Party(s)

Sri. K.K. Vasanth

25 Feb 2020

ORDER

Complaint Filed on:08.02.2016

Disposed On:25.02.2020

                                                                              

BEFORE THE IV ADDL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM BENGALURU

1^ST FLOOR, BMTC, B-BLOCK, TTMC BUILDING, K.H ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BENGALURU – 560 027.

 

 

 

 

 

25^thDAY OF FEBRUARY 2020

 

PRESENT

SMT.PRATHIBHA. R.K., BAL, LLM - PRESIDENT

SMT.N.R.ROOPA, B.A., LLB, MEMBER

 

 

COMPLAINT No.214/2016

 

 

COMPLAINANT	Mrs.Shabana, Aged about 40 years, W/o Mr.Babu, R/at No.1462, Near Water Tank, Gangondana Halli, 10th Cross, Chandralayout, Bengaluru – 560 039.   Advocate – Sri.K.K Vasanth.       V/s
OPPOSITE PARTy	The Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Com. Ltd., Golden Heights, 4th Floor, 4th M Block, 59th C Cross, Dr.Rajkumar Road, Near Ramamandir, Rajajinagar, Bengaluru – 560 010.   Rep. by the Manager/ Authorized Signatory/ Chief Operating Officer.   Advocate– Sri.J.R Jagadish

 

ORDER

 

SMT.PRATHIBHA. R.K., PRESIDENT

 

The complainant has filed this complaintU/s.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986against Opposite Party (herein after referred as OP) with a prayer to direct OP to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with interest at 12% p.a from 11.12.2011 till realization together with cost and to pass such other orders.

 

2. The brief allegations made in the complaint are as under:

 

 

Complainant purchased Team Life Care (India) Universal Pvt. Ltd., insurance policy through agent of OP.  Complainant submitted that the OP agent informed the complainant that the said policy is having a benefit and the said policy is one time investment which would fetch the double the amount of the investment in a period of two years.  Believing the versions and the assurances of the agent of the OP, the complainant invested a sum of Rs.50,000/- as one-time premium with a fond hope of receiving the benefit of Rs.1,00,000/- in a period of two years.  The complainant further submitted that the OP has received a sum of Rs.50,000/- from the complainant and sent a policy bearing No.0142131404 dated 11.12.2009 duly issued by the OP.  The complainant taken the policy for a period of 2 years on one time investment and being not well versed about the terms and conditions of the policy as the complainant has no knowledge and unable to read and write and understanding English Language.  The complainant has kept the policy with her, waiting for expiry of the said two years period.  The complainant approached the OP after two years to collect a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-.  The same was refused by giving an untenable reply and the complainant realized that the agent of OP misrepresented and misguided her in sending the policy which is altogether different from the one assured and promised by the agent as on the date of invest of Rs.50,000/- made by the complainant.  Hence complainant issued a legal notice to the OP calling upon the OP to pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- as investment made on 11.12.2009.  In response to the said legal notice the OP have given an untenable reply dated 26.05.2012.  Hence complainant approached this Forum. 

 

3. In response to the notice issued, OP appeared through their advocate and filed their version contending in brief, as under:

 

OPs submitted that the complaint is barred by limitation as such the same is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed on this ground alone.  The complainant has invested an amount of Rs.50,000/- towards the policy in the month of December 2009.  The complainant ought to have approached the Forum on or before January 2011 i.e., within 2 years from the date of alleged deficiency.  The complainant had failed to appear before the Forum within 2 years.  The complainant approached this Forum after lapse of two years.  Hence the complaint is liable to be dismissed on this ground.

 

OP further submitted that the complainant had availed the policy in question after agreeing to abide with the policy terms and conditions as declared by her in the proposal form submitted by the OP for issuance of the said policy.  Further the complainant has made a declaration that she read the application and she entered in the application is full, complete and true and the OP is believing them to be such, will reply and act on them, otherwise the proposed application becomes void.  Thereafter both the policy holder and the company are bound by the terms and conditions of the insurance policy which is issued by the company.

 

OP further submitted that the complainant was under an obligation to pay renewal premiums annually, to keep the insurance policy in active mode and avail the benefits of the Insurance Policy.  The complainant has paid only one premium amount of Rs.50,000/- and failed and neglected to pay the subsequent renewal premiums and hence the policy issued to her came to be lapsed and foreclosed for non-payment of renewal premium and nothing was payable in view of the policy terms and conditions.

OP further submitted that as per the surrender charge clause if any due regular premium is not paid within the grace period in the first three policy years, the surrender charge would be equal to 100% of the first years allocated premium.  Hence in the instant policy no foreclosure amount was payable to the complainant in view of the foreclosure of the policy for non-payment of regular amount.

 

OP further submitted that the policy was issued to the complainant only after the complainant agreed and accepted the terms and conditions of the policy upon agreeing the same the complainant has paid only one policy premium amount of Rs.50,000/- to the OP and failed to pay the regular premium amount and the policy came to be closed as per the Termination Clause of policy terms and conditions.  Further the statement of account clearly shows that the complainant has invested in various funds like (1) Bajaj Allianz Asset Allocation Fund and (2) Bajaj Allianz Liquid Fund by paying only one premium and failed to pay the subsequent renewal premium amount due to which the fund value fell below to an amount equivalent to one annual premium and thus got foreclosed.  The complainant knowing very well about the said facts has come up with this concocted tory only to mislead the Forum to get a favourable order by suppressing the material facts without submitting the relevant documents to substantiate her illegal complaint.

 

OP further submitted that the complainant has availed Unit Linked Policy as per the terms of the policy and provisions of insurance law in regard to the Unit Linked Insurance policy, risk of investments in the market under the policy as to be borne by the policy holder as per the policy conditions.  Further the premium amount is consideration for taking risk of the life of the insured and the premium so paid takes risk for the period for which the premium has been paid and the company has covered the risk of the complainant till the date of foreclosure of the said policy.   Hence on the above grounds the complaint is not maintainable before this Forum.  Hence OP prays for dismissal of the complaint with exemplary cost.

 

4. In the course of enquiry into the complaint, the complainant and the OP has filed their affidavit reproducing what they have stated in their respective complaint and objections.  Complainant and OP has produced certain documents.Complainant has produced written arguments.  We have heard the arguments of complainant and OP and we have gone through the oral and documentary evidence of both parties scrupulously and posted the case for order.

 

5. Based on the above materials, the following points arise for our consideration;

 

 

1. Whether the complainant has proved that there is deficiency in service on the part of the OP, if so, whether complainant is entitled for the relief sought for?

 

 

2.  What order?

 

6. Our findings on the above points are as under:

 

Point No.1:  Negative

Point No.2:  As per the order below

 

REASONS

 

 

7.Point No.1:-On perusal of the pleadings, evidence and documents produced by both the parties, there is no deficiency on the part of the OP.  The complainant filled the application form and signed the application form and paid the premium amount of Rs.50,000/- to the OP.  Complainant after accepted the policy, OP had issued a policy to the complainant and also send a welcome letter to the complainant dated 11.12.2009.  The complainant received the welcome letter along with the terms and conditions.  OP has given a free look period of 15 days.  If the complainant not interested to proceed further can cancel the policy within 15 days.  Further in the policy it clearly mentioned the date of commencement of the policy is 11.12.2009 for a sum assured of Rs.5,00,000/- and the policy term is for 20 years.  Further in the terms and conditions of the policy clause.6 (2) (c) Surrender Value, which here as under:

 

c) Surrender Value

 

i) The Surrender Value, if any, is payable only after first three Policy Years provided all due Regular Premiums during the first three Policy Years have been paid.  If Regular Premiums due during first three Policy Years have not been paid, the payment of Surrender Value shall be subject to Section 5)b).

 

ii) The Surrender Value payable will be equal to the Regular Premium Fund Value less the Surrender Charge as per Section 33)g) plus the Top Up Premium Fund Value, if any.

 

8. As per the terms and conditions the complainant can surrender the policy after payment of the three regular premiums.  If regular premiums due during first three policy years the payment of surrender value shall be subject to Section 5)b).  Clause 5 (b) (ii) which reads here as under.

 

ii) The Policyholder may revive the Policy within a revival period of two years from the due date of first unpaid Regular Premium subject always to Sub-Section(d) and recovery of any due but unrecovered Charges as per Section 33 and Section 34 except Mortality Charge and any Rider Premium Charge, since due date of first unpaid Regular Premium, failing which the policy shall be terminated and the Surrender Value as on date of termination as per Section 6)c) shall be paid at the end of the third Policy Year or at the expiry of the revival period, whichever is later.

 

 

9. Admittedly the complainant received the said policy and accepted the policy terms and conditions.  The complainant having fully knowledge and knowing the terms and conditions and kept quiet for 2 years.  Now she cannot turn back and say that she is not aware of the policy details.  The OP has reliedon a similar factheld bythe Hon’ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission New Delhi in Revision Petition No.658/2012 in the case Between Ram Lal Aggarwalla Versus Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Co. Ltd., and others.

 

10. Based on the above said facts and citation referred by the OP, we don’t find any deficiency in service on the part of OP by rejecting the claim of the complainant.From the discussion made above, we are of the opinion that, the complainant is not entitled for relief as claimed in the complaint.  Hence we answer the point No.1 in the negative.

 

11. Point No.2: In the result, for the foregoing reasons, we proceed to pass the following order:     

 

 

O R D E R

 

The complaint filed by the complainant U/s.12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is dismissed.  Parties to bear their own costs.

 

Supply free copy of this order to both the parties.

 

(Dictated to the Stenographer, got it transcribed and corrected, pronounced in the Forum on this25^thday of February 2020)

 

 

 

(ROOPA N.R)                                             (PRATHIBHA R.K)

   MEMBER                                                     PRESIDENT

 

 

Witnesses examined on behalf of the complainant by way of affidavit:

 

Shabana

 

 

 

Copies of documents produced on behalf of complainant:

 

Ex-A1	Copy ofpolicy No.0142131404
Ex-A2	Copy of notice dated 07.02.2012.
Ex-A3	Copy of reply dated 26.05.2012.
Ex-A4	Copy of complaint dated 21.11.2014.
Ex-A5	Copy of postal receipts.
Ex-A6	Copy of registration of complaint dated 27.11.2015.
Ex-A7	Copy of information downloaded from OP website.

 

 

Witnesses examined on behalf of the OP by way of affidavit:

 

Sri.Aravinda M, who being the Sough Zonal Legal Manager of OP Insurance Company.

 

Copy of document produced on behalf of Opposite Party:

 

1)	Copy of authority Revision Petition No.658/2012

 

 

 

 

(ROOPA N.R)                                             (PRATHIBHA R.K)

   MEMBER                                                     PRESIDENT