Haryana

Sonipat

228/2014

SANJAY KUMAR S/O RAVI DUTT - Complainant(s)

Versus

THE BIRLA LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

INDER DAHIYA

20 Aug 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

SONEPAT.

               

 

                                Complaint No.228 of 2014

                                Instituted on:09.09.2014

                                Date of order:20.08.2015

 

Sanjay Kumar son of Ravi Dutt, r/o V&PO Bhainswan Khurd, tehsil Gohana, distt. Sonepat.

…Complainant.  

Versus

 

The Birla Sun Life Insurance Company Limited, Sonepat through its Manager/authorized signatory.

                                                     …Respondent.

 

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF       

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

Argued by: Ms. Indu Dahiya Adv. for complainant.

           Sh. Vikas Bakshi Adv. for respondent. 

 

BEFORE     NAGENDER SINGH, PRESIDENT.

          PRABHA WATI, MEMBER.

          D.V. RATHI, MEMBER.

 

O R D E R

 

          Complainant has filed the present complaint against the respondent alleging therein that he purchased one policy bearing no.002000198 dated 5.9.2008 for unit value of Rs.639357/- from the respondent. The complainant was assured that he had to pay only three installments and after payment of third installment, he will be entitled to receive the amount of Rs.639357/-.  The complainant deposited three installments of Rs.15040/- each with the respondent.   The complainant visited the office of the respondent and demanded Rs.45120/- with interest, but of no use and that amounts to a grave deficiency in service on the part of the respondent.

2.        The respondent appeared and filed written statement submitting therein that the life assured had paid three premium of Rs.15040/- each with the respondent having fully knowledge about the premium, main features and plan of the policy.  After understanding the terms and conditions of the policy, the proposal form was signed by the complainant.  The complainant had purchased the policy from the respondent on 5.9.2008 and he has filed the present complaint on 21.8.2014. So, the present complaint is time barred.  The complainant is not entitled for any relief and thus, prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

3.        We have heard the arguments advanced by the ld. Counsel for both the parties at length and we have also gone through the entire relevant material available on the case file carefully & minutely.

4.        Ld. Counsel for the respondent has submitted that the life assured had paid three premium of Rs.15040/- each with the respondent having fully knowledge about the premium, main features and plan of the policy.  After understanding the terms and conditions of the policy, the proposal form was signed by the complainant.  The complainant had purchased the policy from the respondent on 5.9.2008 and he has filed the present complaint on 21.8.2014. So, the present complaint is time barred.  The complainant is not entitled for any relief.  In support of his contention, he has relied upon the case law titled as Grasim Industries Ltd. Vs. Aggarwal Steel wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that when a person signs a document, there is a presumption, unless there is proof of force or fraud that he has read the document properly and understood it and only then he has affixed his signatures thereon, otherwise no signature on a document can ever be accepted”.

          First of all, we hereby decide the issue whether the present complaint is time barred or not?

          The respondent has submitted that the complainant had purchased the policy from the respondent on 5.9.2008 and has filed the present complaint on 21.8.2014.

          The perusal of the document Ex.C5 shows that the premium paid certificate was issued by the respondent to the complainant on 21.2.2014.  In our view, from the said date, cause of action has arisen in favour of the complainant.  The complainant has filed the present complaint against the respondent on 9.9.2014, which in our view is maintainable and cannot be said to be time barred in any manner.

          Now coming to the merits of the case.

          We have perused the surrender charge-rate per 10000 of sum assured which is mentioned below:-

 

Surrender charge-rate per 10000 of sum assured         Year 1               900-00

 

.Deducted from your policy fund value at the time      Years 2              600-00

You surrender

 

.Guaranteed to never increase.                         Year 3               300-00

 

                                                       Thereafter           Nil.

 

 

              We have also perused the document C6 i.e. Policy account statement w.e.f. 1.4.2013 to 21.2.2014.

          As per this document, unit fund value of Rs.15040/- was Rs.23239/-, which in our view was higher than the premium paid.  It is pertinent to mention here that in the document C6, fund value i.e. Rs.23,239/- was of rs.15040/-.  But till date, the complainant has deposited an amount of Rs.45120/- with the respondents i.e. Rs.15040/- each on 5.9.2008, 29.10.2009 and 10.11.2010.

          So, in our view, the ends of justice would be fully met if directions are given to the respondent to refund the amount of Rs.45120/- to the complainant. Accordingly, we hereby direct the respondent to refund the amount of Rs.45120/- (Rs.forty five thousands one hundred twenty) to the complainant within a period of one month from the date of passing of this order, otherwise, the above said amount shall fetch interest at the rate of 09% per annum from the date of passing of this order till its realization and further to compensate the complainant to the tune of Rs.3000/- (Rs.three thousands) for rendering deficient services, for harassment and under the head of litigation expenses.

 

          With these observations, findings and directions, the present complaint stands allowed.

          Certified copy of this order be provided to both the parties free of cost.

File be consigned to the record-room.

 

 

(Prabha Wati)        (DV Rathi)                 (Nagender Singh-President)

Member DCDRF        Member DCDRF                   DCDRF, Sonepat.

 

Announced: 20.08.2015