Andhra Pradesh

Visakhapatnam-II

CC/214/2013

Muddada Satyavathi - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Senior Divisional Manager - Opp.Party(s)

Volete Gopal

03 Jan 2015

ORDER

                                              Date of Registration of the Complaint:23-08.2013

                                                                                                Date of Order:03-01-2015

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMERS FORUM-II AT

                             VISAKHAPATNAM

 

P  r  e  s  e  n  t:

1.  Sri H. Ananda Rao, M.A., L.L.B.,

     President           

2. Smt K. Saroja, M.A. B.L.,

     Lady Member 

                                3. Sri C.V. Rao,  M.A., B.L.,

                                     Male Member

 

                            Saturday, the 3^rd day of January, 2015.

                                 CONSUMER CASE No.214/2013

Between:-

Muddada Satyavathi, wife of late Krishna,

Hindu, aged about 62 years, residing at

D.No.50-6-22, Sethammapet,Visakhapatnam.

….. Complainant

And:-

1.The Senior Divisional Manager,

   M/s. Life Insurance Corporation of India,

   Visakhapatnam-530 004.

2.The Manager (Claims),

   M/s. Life Insurance Corporation of India,

   Visakhapatnam-530 004.    

3.The Branch Manager,

   M/s. Life Insurance Corporation of India,

   City Branch II-69 A,

   Visakhapatnam-530 004.

4.The Area Manager,

   Food Corporation of India, Dwarakanagar,

   Visakhapatnam-530 016.

                                                                                          …  Opposite Parties  

                     

          This case coming on 17.12.2014 for final hearing before us in the presence of Sri Sri Voleti Gopal, Advocate for the Complainant and Sri V.V.V.S.S.M. Raja Rao, Advocate for the Opposite Parties 1 to 3 and the 4^th Opposite Party being exparte and having stood over till this date for consideration, this Forum made the following:

 

                                                ORDER

          (As per Sri. H. Ananda Rao, Honourable President, on behalf of the Bench)

 

1.       This consumer complaint is filed by the Complainant against the Opposite Parties directing them to pay profits and bonus of the policy of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakhs only) in policy baring No.692541715 under table and term of 27-27 and Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) towards deficiency in service with costs.

 

 2.      The case of the Complainant in brief is that during the life time of her husband, he has taken a policy from the Opposite Parties on 28.05.2010 bearing No.692541715 for a sum of Rs.1,80,000/- under the table and term of 27-27 and after payment of premium through salary and on his death on 21.02.2013, the Complainant settled the claim with the Opposite Parties on 28.03.2013 without profits.   It is also her case as per the terms and conditions of the policy after the period of 5 years the policy will be converted into endowment policy with profits.    But the Opposite Parties did not make any intimation about the same and that she was never given any information whether the policy is to be converted upon the payment of additional premium amount and thereby violated the terms and conditions of the policy bond.   That on coming to know the same, she approached the agents of the Opposite Parties who advised that she is entitled to in the profits on the policy and on that she got issued notice dated 12.06.2013 for which no response.   Hence, this Complaint.

 

3.       The case of the Opposite Parties denying the material averments of the Complainant contended that there is no deficiency of service on their part.   However, stated that it is clearly mentioned in the policy copy “on the written request of the proposer or his assigns made at the end of 5 years from the date of commencement of the policy and before payment of the premium falling due immediately thereafter, provided the policy is in full force, the Corporation will convert the policy into an Endowment Assurance Policy with profits or without profits payable at the end of the term specified in the written request at the rate of terms specified in the Convertible Whole Life Assurance Scheme of the Corporation’s Prospectus or Tables of rates in force on the date of conversion at the rates applicable to Endowment Assurance with Profits the policy will be entitled to the Bonuses from the date of conversion at the rates applicable to Endowment Assurance Policies.

 

4.       That the deceased/Complainant policy holder did not choose for conversion of the policy for additional benefits as per terms and conditions of the policy to avail the option for Additional Benefits.   Since no enhanced/additional premium is received by the Opposite Parties for additional benefits, they are not liable to pay any amount, which the policy holder does not entitle.   Therefore, the complaint is liable to be dismissed.

 

5.       To prove the case of the Complainant, she filed her sworn affidavit and got marked Exs.A1 to A5.   On the other hand, on behalf of the Opposite Parties their Manager filed his sworn affidavit and got marked Exs.B1 to B5.

 

6.       Ex.A1 is Bond cop bearing Policy No.692541715 dated 28.05.1993.   Ex.A2 is the Regd. Lawyer’s Notice got issued by the Complainant’s counsel to Opposite Parties dated 12.06.2013.   Ex.A3 is the Acknowledgement Card from the 1^st Opposite Party dated 17.06.2013.   Ex.A4 is the Acknowledgement Card from the 2^nd Opposite Part dated 17.06.2013.   Ex.A5 is the Acknowledgment Card from the 3^rd Opposite Party dated 17.06.2013.  

 

7.       Ex.B1 is the Status Report of Policy No.692341713 issued by the Opposite Parties on 06.11.2013.   Ex.B2 is the Attested Policy Bond copy issued by the Opposite Parties in favour of the Complainant dated 28.05.1993.  Ex.B3 is the attested copy of Claim/Surrender History Record and Policy bond copy dated 06.11.2013.  Ex.B4 is the Payment Voucher already prepaid table of term 27-27 dated 22.03.2013.   Ex.B5 is the Payment Voucher Already Prepaid table of term 27-27 dated 22.03.2013.

 

8.       Both parties filed their respective written arguments.  

 

9.       Heard oral arguments from both sides.

 

10.     Now the point that arises for determination is:-

Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties and the Complainant is not entitled for the reliefs asked for:

 

11.     As seen from record, it is not in dispute that the husband of the Complainant during his life time taken the policy from the Opposite Parties bearing No.692341713 dated 28.05.2010 for a sum of Rs.1,80,000/- under the table term of 27-27 and without any default, he paid the installments amount for period of 20 years by way of salary savings scheme and after his death  on 21.02.2013 the Complainant herein made the claim and it was settled on 28.03.2013 are not in dispute.  

 

12.     According to the Complainant as per the terms and conditions of the policy after a period of 5 years the policy will be converted into endowment policy with profits but due to non-intimation, and non-information of the Opposite Parties, they have not converted the same upon payment of Additional Premium Amount.   The Opposite Parties denied the same.   Therefore, it is relevant for me to drawer attention to Ex.A1 policy issued by the Opposite Parties in the name of the deceased husband of the Complainant.   It goes to show, it isa Salary Savings Scheme and payable installments premium every month.   On a careful perusal of the policy, it is  evident that a special provision indicated as follows.  “On the written request of the proposal  or his assigns made at the end of  5 years from the date of commencement of the policy and before payment of premium falling due immediately thereafter, provided the policy is then in full force, the Corporation will convert the policy into an Endowment Assurance Policy with Profits or without profits payable at the end of the term specified in the written request at the rate and terms specified in the convertible Whole Life Assurance Scheme of the Corporation Prospectus or tables on rates in force on the date of the Policy”    If the policy is converted into our Endowment  Assurance Policy with Profits or without profits the policy will entitled to the bonuses from the date of conversion at the rates applicable to Endowment Assurance Policies.

 

13.     As seen from record it is an evident that the deceased policy holder did not choose for conversion of the policy for additional benefits “NO OPTION IS EXCERCISED’ and it is further clear that “ NO ADDITIONAL PREMIUM IS PAID”  as per the terms and conditions to avail the option for additional benefits.   It is a fact that the deceased is an employee therefore, it cannot be held that he was having minimum additional qualification.   Therefore, he could easily understand the contents of the policy terms and conditions since he was having the policy with him.   Therefore,   it can be further held having known about the terms and conditions of the policy he has not exercised the aforesaid option by paying additional premium.   Since no enhanced additional premium is received by the Opposite Parties for additional benefits, we are of the considered view, that the Opposite Parties are not liable to pay any amount which the policy holder does not entitled, as the eligible amount under the said policy is already received by the Complainant herein.   For these reasons, we are further held that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Parties, therefore the Complaint is liable to be dismissed.

 

14.     In the result, this Complaint is dismissed.   No costs.

     Dictated to the Steno, transcribed by him, corrected and pronounced by us in the Open Forum, this the 3^rd day of January, 2015.

Sd/-                                     Sd/-                                               Sd/-

Male Member                     Lady Member                                     President

                            

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

For the Complainant:-

NO.	DATE	DESCRIPTIONOFTHEDOCUMENTS	REMARKS
Ex.A01	28.05.1993	Policy bearing No.692541715 Bond copy	Original
Ex.A02	12.06.2013	Regd. Lawyers’ Notice got issued by the Complainant’s counsel to OPs	Original
Ex.A03	17.06.2013	Acknowledgement Card of OP1	Original
Ex.A04	17.06.2013	Acknowledgment Card of OP-2	Original
Ex.A05	17.06.2013	Acknowledgement Card of OP3	Original

For the Opposite Parties:-               

NO.	DATE	DESCRIPTIONOFTHEDOCUMENTS	REMARKS
Ex.B01	06.11.2013	Status Report of Policy No.692341713 issued by the Ops	Original
Ex.B02	28.05.1993	Policy Bond copy	Attested copy
Ex.B03	06.11.2013	Claim/Surrender History Record and Policy bond copy.	Attested copy
Ex.B04	22.03.2013	Payment Voucher already prepaid table of term 27-27	Attested copy
Ex.B05	22.03.2013	Payment Voucher Already Prepaid table of term 27-27	Attested copy

 

Sd/-                                     Sd/-                                                Sd/-

Male Member                     Lady Member                                      President