Haryana

Yamunanagar

CC/229/2011

Amita Verma W/o Anil Kumar - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

S.C.Jindal

09 Apr 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, YAMUNA NAGAR.

                                                                                                             Complaint no….. 229 of 2011

                                                                                                             Date of Institution.. 16.3.2011  

                                                                                                             Date of Decision:9.4.2015

1. Amita Verma wife of Sh. Anil Kumar Verma r/o House No. 485 Court Road, Opposite State Bank of Patiala ADB Branch, Jagadhri District Yamuna Nagar.
2. Siddarath Verma son of Sh. Anil Verma, resident of House No. 485 Court Road, Opposite State Bank of Patiala ADB Branch, Jagadhri District Yamuna Nagar.
3. Megham Verma minor son of Smt. Amita Verma through his mother Smt. Amita Verma who is next friend and guardian resident of House No. 485, Court Road, Opposite SBOP ADB Branch, Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar.

                                                                                                                              …….Complainant

                                         Versus       

           

1. The Divisional Manager, Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Company Limited, Ist Floor, Ganpat Building Opposite Madhu Hotel, Jagadhri Road, Yamuna Nagar, Tehsil Jagadhri, District Yamuna Nagar.
2. Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Company Limited, GE Plaza, Ground Floor, Airport Road Yerawada, PUNE, 411006.

                                                                                                                     ……… Opposite parties.

 

                   Complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.

 

CORAM:    SH. A.K.SARDANA, PRESIDENT,

                  SH. S.C.SHARMA, MEMBER.

 

Present:    Sh. S.C. Jindal Advocate Counsel for Complainant.

                 OPs ex-parte vide order dated 23.8.2013.

 

ORDER

                    Brief facts leading to the institution of the present complaint are that the complainant purchased two life insurance policies bearing No. 0047655300 and 0047194771 commencing from 28.3.2007 and the respondents/OPs assured the complainant that OP/company will provide best services and each & every work will be fair and transparent. The OPs further assured the complainant for best returns of the investment and believing their version true, the complainant invested the money in above mentioned policies. It was also assured by the OPs that at the time of redemption of the units of the policies, on the written application of the complainant, money will be refunded to her. It is further submitted that as per policy conditions, complainant surrendered both above mentioned policies in the office of OP No.1 on 21.10.2010 vide request No. PSO1892039 and PSO1892429  and OPs assured that money will be refunded to her very soon but the same was not refunded to the complainant despite surrender of policies to the OPs. The complainant also issued emails as well as legal notice dated 30.10.2010 through counsel to the OPs and thereafter complainant received two cheques dated 8.2.2011 for Rs. Rs. 71,600/- & Rs. 1,19,310/- respectively  on 15.2.2011, which were incomplete payment/ refund against the said policies and thus both cheques were returned to OP No.1 being short payment on 16.2.2011. It has been further alleged by the complainant that the non-action on the lawful and genuine claim of the complainant by the OPs is not only negligent but deficient too, which have attracted the provisions of Consumer Protection Act and have caused mental agony, harassment and loss to the complainant. In the end, complainant has requested that OPs be directed to make payment of abovesaid policies as per market rate prevailing on 21.10.2010 alongwith interest @ 24% per annum from 21.10.2010 till realization and pay a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- as compensation & Rs. 11000/- for costs of litigation etc.

2.                     Upon notice, OPs appeared through counsel on 6.5.2011 but were proceeded against ex-parte on 11.8.2011 due to non appearance and thereafter OPs moved an application for setting aside the ex-parte order through Parveen Kumar, the then Divisional Manager Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Company ltd. Yamuna Nagar wherein OPs were allowed to join the proceedings vide order dated 8.7.2013 but thereafter OPs again did not bother to contest the case and were proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 23.8.2013.  

4.                     To prove his case, counsel for complainant has tendered into evidence, 2 affidavits of complainant as Annexure CX & CY and documents as Annexures C-1 to C-14 and closed the evidence on behalf of complainant. Documents so tendered by complainant are detailed as under:-

1.         Annexure C-1- Photo copy of policy No. 0047194771 alongwith terms and conditions.

2          Annexure C-2-Photo copy of Policy No. 0047655300 alongwith terms and conditions.

3.         Annexure C-3- Photo copy of statement of account of policy No. 0047655300 as on 26.10.2010.  

4.         Annexure C-4- Photo copy of statement of account of Policy No. 0047194771 as on 26.10.2010.  

5.         Annexure C-5- Photo copy of letter dated 21.10.2010 of OP regarding intimation of surrender value of Policy No. 0047655300.

6.         Annexure C-6- Photo copy of letter dated 21.10.2010 of OP regarding intimation of surrender value of Policy No. 0047194771.

7.         Annexure C-7- Copy of Legal Notice dated 30.10.2010 served on OPs.  

8.         Annexure C-8- Postal receipt No. 2084 dated 1.11.2010.

9.         Annexure C-9-Postal receipt No. 2085 dated 1.11.2010.

10.       Annexure C-10 –Acknowledgement (AD).

11.       Annexure C-11 –Photo copy of letter dated 16.2.2011 sent by complainant to OPs for returning of two cheques.   

12.       Annexure C-12 –Photo copy of cheque amounting to Rs. 71,602/- dated 8.2.2011 returned to OPs relating to Policy No. 0047655300.

13.       Annexure C-13 - Photo copy of cheque amounting to Rs. 1,19,310/- dated 8.2.2011 returned to OPs relating to Policy No. 0047194771.

14.       Annexure C-14-Copy of letter dated 4.4.2014 sent by complainant No.2 to OPs qua return of cheque No. 154036 dated 24.3.2014 amounting to Rs. 1,63,619/- received during pendency of case.

 5.                    We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and have also gone through the pleadings as well as documents placed on court file by the complainant. Learned counsel for the complainant argued that the complainant No.1 had purchased two policies i.e. one policy bearing No. 0047194771 ( Annexure C-1) in the name of her son complainant No.2 whose date of birth is 8.1.1990 for a sum assured of Rs. 5,00,000/- only wherein the complainant No.1 is the nominee of the said life assured and  another policy bearing No. 0047655300 (Annexure C-2) in the name of her minor son i.e. complainant No.3 whose date of birth is 17.10.1995 for a sum assured of Rs. 5,00,000/- wherein the complainant No.1 is nominee of her son ( life assured). The maturity date of both the policies was  28.3.2027 and premium was year-wise at that time. Learned counsel for the complainant has drawn the attention of this Forum towards the terms and conditions of policy documents ( Annexure C-1 & C-2) wherein at clause 7(d) of the terms under heading “ Partial withdrawal”,  it has been mentioned that the insured can opt for partial withdrawal after three years if regular premium has been paid by the life assured. Learned counsel for the complainant has also drawn our attention on documents Annexure C-3 & C-4 respectively wherein the complainant have paid regular premium of Rs. 1,50,000/- each in both policies.

                        Learned counsel for the complainant further urged that documents Annexure C-5 & C-6 are very material for deciding the fate and liability of OPs as these documents have been issued by the OPs on 21.10.2010 wherein it has been clearly mentioned that the respondents have admitted the surrender value of Rs. 1,54,704.22 & Rs. 1,64,128.58 of policy bearing No.  0047655300 & 0047194771 respectively but the OPs delivered two cheques of Rs. 71,602/- ( Annexure C-12) and Rs. 1,19,310/- (Annexure C-13) dated 8.2.2011 in lieu of policy bearing No. 47655300 & 47194771 respectively which were also returned vide letter dated 16.2.2011 (Annexure C-11) on the ground that court case is pending and amount so refunded is also less. Learned counsel for the complainant further urged that the complainants have been debarred from using their lawful money at the time when it was required by them i.e. on 21.10.2010 and thus there is an admittedly deficiency and negligence in service on the part of OPs and as such the conduct of OPs is not fair rather by virtue of their monopolistic act and unfair trade practices, the complainant is entitled for special and punitive damages against the OPs. The inordinate delay on the part of OPs in not disbursing the amount of the admitted liability clearly indicates the deficiency and negligence on their part. To further strengthen their claim, learned counsel for the complainant has relied upon the case law titled as Malikarujan Sakri Versus Branch Manager Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. & Others reported in 2014(1) Consumer Law Today page 476 (National Commission) wherein it has been held that “delay in settlement of claim despite receiving surveyor report and keeping the claim pending for a long time and no satisfactory explanation is forthcoming, held that it clearly indicates that there is deficiency in service on the part of insurance company in keeping the claim pending for such a long time without any reasonable explanation.”

6.                     In view of the detailed facts & case law discussed above, we are of the confirmed opinion that the OPs have committed grave negligence and deficiency in service in settling the claim of the complainant as in policy No. 0047655300 & 0047194771,  the surrender value of policy was worked out at Rs. 1,54,704/- & Rs. 1,64,128/- respectively whereas the OPs have sent cheques of Rs. 71602/- and Rs. 119310/- to the complainants against the aforesaid policies on account of their surrender value and the complainant has returned the same to the OPs being insufficient amount of surrendered value already communicated by them in Annexure C-5 & C-6.  Moreover, neither the OPs have defended their case before the Forum nor paid the surrendered value of policies already assessed by them to the complainant. As such, in this situation, we have no hesitation in holding that OP’s are not only negligent & deficient in settling the claim of complainant rather have committed an unfair trade practice by not disbursing the surrendered value amounting to Rs. 1,54,704/- & Rs. 1,64,128/-  pertaining to policies bearing No. 0047655300 & 0047194771 respectively as is clear from Annexure C-5 & C-6.  Therefore, we allow the present complaint and direct the OPs to comply with the following directions within 30 days from the communication of this order:-

1. To  pay a sum of Rs. 1,54,704/- and Rs. 1,64,128/- pertaining to policies bearing No. 0047655300 & 0047194771 respectively to the complainants No.1 & 2 along with simple interest @ 9 % per annum from 21.10.2010 to till the date of decision of case.
2. To further pay a sum of Rs. 30,000/- to the complainants No.1 & 2 as compensation on account of harassment & Mental agony etc. caused to the complainants for a long period of more than four years (i.e. from the date of 21.10.2010 to till the decision of complaint) by their negligent as well as deficient acts. 
3. To pay Rs. 30,000/- to the complainants No.1 & 2 as punitive damages on account of unfair trade practices and monopolistic acts committed by the OP insurance company by delaying the payment of genuine claim.
4. To pay Rs. Rs. 11000/- to the complainants No.1 & 2 as costs for unwanted litigation including advocates fee etc.  

                        The aforesaid directions must be complied  with by the Ops within the stipulated period otherwise all the aforesaid awarded amounts shall fetch further simple interest @ 12 % per annum  for the period of default. The complaint is decided accordingly in the above terms. 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:  9.4.2015

   

                                                                                     

                                                                                                                                    ( A.K SARDANA )

                                                                                                                                                              PRESIDENT

 

 

 

                                                                                                                                                              ( S.C.SHARMA )

                                                                                                                                                                 MEMBER