The Complainant has filed this case alleging deficiency-in-service by the O.Ps, where O.P No.1 is the Branch Manager, SBI Life Insurance Company Ltd., F.M Golai, Balasore and O.P No.2 is the Deputy Manager (O.P.S), SBI Life Insurance Company Ltd., Jayadev Vihar, Bhubaneswar.

                    1. Succinctly put the brief facts, which are material to the case are that the father of the Complainant had deposited Rs.3.00 Lacs (Rupees Three lakhs) only with the O.Ps- Insurance Company vide Policy No.22000597606 (SBI Life Annuity Plus) vide Proposal No.22184086-Single payment on 17.06.2013 bearing deposit receipt No.BAL/IP/36372. The Complainant is the nominee for the said deposit Policy. The Policy holder died on 05.12.2013, due to heart attack. The Complainant as well as nominee of the said deposit Policy intimated to the O.P-Insurance Company and submitted all the required documents, along with the claim settlement form before the O.Ps on 20.01.2014, which was duly received by the O.P-Insurance Company on 21.01.2014. But the O.P-Insurance Company did not prefer to settle the claim rather they sent a bunch of xerox copies of documents (filed in this case) to the Complainant on 03.12.2014. Thereafter, the Complainant served a legal notice to the O.Ps through his Advocate on 30.12.2014 by Regd. Post with A/D, requesting them to settle the death claim of his father, but the O.Ps did not comply with, for which the Complainant filed this case. Prayer for refund of Rs.3.00 Lacs (Rupees Three lakhs) only to the Complainant, along with compensation for mental agony and harassment and financial loss.

                    2. Written version filed by the O.Ps through their Advocate, where they have denied about maintainability as well as its cause of action. They have also submitted that the Complainant has misinterpreted the term and conditions of the Policy available with us.

                    3. On perusal of the case record and the documents filed by both the contesting Parties, it is noticed that:-

(i) The deceased Nilakantha Nayak was the holder of Annuity plus Policy, wherein the benefits payable under the Policy is the Annuity payouts. Accordingly, the deceased had opted for “Joint life annuity” with life and last survivor- 100% income with capital refund option, where second Annuitant was Mrs. Padmabati Nayak. As per option exercised by the deceased, he was paid annuities amounting to Rs.1,562/- on monthly basis till January, 2014 and after the death of Nilakantha Nayak, the annuities amounting Rs.1,562/- per month has been paid to the second Annuitant Smt. Padmabati Nayak from February, 2014 to June, 2016. 

(ii) Prayer of the Complainant to refund the claim amount is not permissible by the O.P-Insurance Company, which is clearly mentioned in page No.10 (Annuity option description) of the Policy document, which reads as “On death of the first annuitant, if the second annuitant is alive, we shall continue to pay the annuity installments throughout the life of the surviving second annuitant. On Subsequent death of the second annuitant, we will refund the premium paid under the base Policy to the nominee. Future annuity payment will cease immediately”.

(iii) The above said Policy is an annuity plus Policy and not a Life insurance Policy, wherein defined sum assured is payable on the death of the life insured. Both the insured and the insurer are bound by the terms and conditions of the Policy.

(iv) It is not material, who fills the proposal form, it is material to give the correct information and it is the responsibility of the insured. And also “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”.

(a) Annuitant means “a person, who holds or receives an annuity”.

(b) Annuity means:-     1. a yearly grant or allowance.

                                      2. an investment of money entitling the investor to a series                          

                                          of equal annuals sums over a stated period.

                                      3. a sum payable in respect of a particular year.

            But Premium means “an amount to be paid for a contract of insurance”.

                    4. Hence, it is ascertained that Late Nilakantha Nayak had invested certain sum with the O.Ps to receive annuity. An amount of Rs.1,562/- per month has been credited to the account of the second Annuitant namely Smt. Padmabati Nayak till the month of June, 2016 as disclosed by the document submitted by the O.Ps on 21.12.2016 in the Forum. No materials has been placed before the Forum, whether the second annuitant is alive or not at present. But it has been submitted by the Advocate for Complainant that the second annuitant is alive at present, which is not disputed by the Advocate for the O.Ps. So in the circumstances according to the terms and conditions of the Policy, second annuitant is entitled for a sum of Rs.1,562/- per month from July, 2016 onwards till she is alive; subject to submission of Existence Certificate by the second annuitant to the O.Ps on every Policy anniversary month and thereafter the nominee (i.e. the Complainant) is entitled for the Policy amount as per terms and conditions of Policy. So, in the circumstances the Complainant is not entitled for any relief as prayed for. Hence Ordered:-

                                                     O R D E R

                        The Consumer case is dismissed on contest against the O.Ps, but in peculiar circumstance, without cost.

                        Pronounced in the open Forum on this day i.e. the 16th day of January, 2017 given under my Signature & Seal of the Forum.