This Complaint coming up before us for hearing on 02-02-12 in the presence of Sri R.K. Srinivasa Murthy, advocate for the complainant and of Sri.G.Erukala Reddy, advocate for opposite parties, upon perusing the material on record, after hearing bothsides and having stood over till this day for consideration this Forum made the following:-

O R D E R

Per SRI M.V.L.RADHA KRISHNA MURTHY,  Member:-

This complaint filed u/s 12 of Consumer Protection Act praying to direct the opposite parties to pay an amount of Rs.75,000/- to the complainant towards interest due at 9% p.a., on the surrender value of Rs.98,979/- from 01-11-2002 till date of filing and to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards compensation for the mental agony  suffered by the complainant and costs of Rs.3,000/-.

2.   The averments of the complaint in brief are as follows:  

        Complainant insured his life with LIC of India rep. by opposite parties under policy No.670670305 on 15-08-99 for an assured amount of Rs.1,00,000/- from Vinukonda Branch of OP1, the date of maturity being 15-09-2014. The classification of the policy is Jeevan Mitra (double cover endowment plan with profits with accidental benefit under salary savings scheme).   Complainant paid premiums under the said policy regularly upto 31-10-02 and subsequently discontinued.  The complainant surrendered the said policy under intimation to Opposite party2 by his letter dated 24-05-04 and enclosed the duly filled in Form No.5074/3510 which was acknowledged by Opposite party 2.  

3.     No timely action was initiated by the opposite parties to the request of the complainant for payment of the surrendered value amount under the said policy and to the surprise of the complainant he received a reply notice dated a 31-05-06 from opposite party2 that they have thoroughly checked for the policy and they could not trace it and informed the complainant to contact the LIC officers at Vijayawada , Cuddapa & guntur branch offices.  The contents of letter dated 31-05-06 of opposite party2 reveal the irresponsible state of affairs in the office of opposite party2.  After persuasive representations complainant received a cheque dated 31.05.10 for Rs.98,979 towards surrendered value under the said policy.  The said payment of Rs.98,979/- was duly delayed by 8 years.  Complainant sent a representation dated 15-07-10 requesting the opposite parties for payment of admissible interest at 9% p.a. on the surrendered amount of Rs.98,979/- from 01-11-2002 till date.  Having acknowledged receipt of the surrender application opposite party1 sent an evasive reply with false averments stating that the policy was surrendered on 31-05-10. Opposite parties have not chosen to reply to the legal notice dated 15-07-10 and failed to comply with the request of the complainant for payment of interest thereon.  Thus there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties.  Hence the complaint

4.     1^st Opposite party filed its version affidavit which was adopted by 2^nd and 3^rdopposite parties and the contents thereof in brief are as follows. 

Complainant has taken L.I.C, Policy for an assured amount of Rs.1,00,000/- from this Opposite party and paid premium up to 9/2002 with F.U.P. 10/2002 and he sent his surrendered application and it was acknowledged by Opposite party2 on 24-05-04.  We have settled the Policy and we paid value of the surrendered amount of Rs.98,979/- acquired as on the date of calculation i.e. on 31-05-10.  If we have taken date of calculation as 24-05-2004 i.e. his date of surrendered application, the surrendered amount will be Rs.66,270/- only.  Surrounded value will be calculated basing on the duration of the policy i.e. no. of years lapsed from the date of commencement of the policy to the date of calculation, paid up value, Bonus and surrender value factor.  As we have already paid interest, there is no necessity to pay interest again on the surrendered amount from the date of surrendered application.  There is no deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties.  Hence complaint may be dismissed with costs. 

5.     Complainant filed affidavit in support of his allegations in the complainant reiterating the same. 

6.     On behalf of the complainant exhibits A1 to A12 are marked, and on behalf Of opposite parties Exhibit B1 was marked. 

7.    Now the point for consideration is :-

1. Whether there is deficiency of service on the opposite parties.

2. To What relief the complainant is entitled to. 

8.   POINT 1:-  The case of the complainant is that he has obtained a  policy from opposite parties and paid premium up to 31-10-2002 and subsequently discontinued and sent surrendered application to the opposite parties dated 24-05-2004 and that the opposite parties have paid an amount of Rs.98,979/- through a cheque dated 31-05-2010  after a long lapse of 8 years, and has not paid the interest and that there by opposite parties committed deficiency of service.

9.     The case of opposite parties is that they have paid the surrender value of the policy upto 31-05-10 through cheque dated 31-05-10 and that therefore they need not pay any interest,  and that there is no deficiency of service on their part. 

10.   It is not in dispute that the complainant obtained a policy from opposite parties corporation and has paid premiums upto 31-10-02.  Admittedly the complainant sent surrender application of the policy to the opposite parties on 24-05-04 and the same was received by opposite parties.  According to opposite parties the surrender value of the policy as on the date of surrender i.e. 24-05-04 is Rs.66,270/- only.  But the opposite parties calculated the surrender value of the policy as per Ex-B1upto 31.05.10 and arrived at Rs.98,979/-  and paid the surrendered value of the amount up to 31-05-10 through a cheque dated 31-05-2010.  Since, opposite parties have calculated the surrendered value of the policy amount up to 31-05-10 i.e.. till the date of payment there is no necessity for them to pay an additional interest thereon.  The complainant sent surrender application of the policy on 24-05-04, where as the amount of the surrendered value was paid by opposite parties on 31-05-10.  Thus there is delay of 6 years from the date of surrender till the date of payment of the surrendered value of the policy amount by the opposite parties.  Therefore, it can be safely concluded that there is deficiency of the service on the part of the opposite parties in paying the surrender value amount of the policy to the complainant.  Accordingly, we find deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties, for which opposite parties are liable to pay compensation to the complainant.  Accordingly this issue is answered. 

11.    POINT 2:-  As already stated above there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite parties in paying the surrendered value of the policy to the complainant.  Complainant claimed a sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards compensation.  The amount of compensation claimed by the complainant is too high and imaginary.  Therefore in view of the facts and circumstance of the case, we feel it just and necessary to award compensation of Rs.5,000/-  for the mental agony suffered by the complainant.  Accordingly this issue is answered. 

12.    In the result the complaint is allowed in part as indicated below : 

        1.  The opposite parties are hereby directed to pay compensation of                   Rs.5,000/- to the complainant for the mental agony suffered                     by the complainant. 

2. Opposite parties are further directed to pay an amount of                              Rs.1,000/- to the complainant towards costs of the complaint. 

      The above order shall be complied with in a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the amount awarded towards compensation will carry interest at 9% p.a. till the date of payment. 

Typed to my dictation by Junior Stenographer, corrected by me and pronounced in the open Forum dated this the 13^th day of February, 2012.

MEMBER                                       MEMBER                                 PRESIDENT

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Complainant:

FOR OPPOSITE PARTY:   

                                                                                   PRESIDENT