Punjab

Ludhiana

CC/18/565

Balwinder Kaur - Complainant(s)

Versus

Edelweiss Tokio Life sIns.Co.Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

HP Singh adv

05 Apr 2022

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, LUDHIANA.

                                                Complaint No:565 dated 11.09.2018                              

                           Date of decision: 05.04.2022.

 

Balwinder Kaur aged about 43 years, wife of late Sh.Manjeet Singh son of Late Sh.Didar Singh, Resident of House No.B-408/11, Durlabh Nagar, Samrala, District Ludhiana.                                                                                                                                                                    ..…Complainant

 

1.Edelweiss Tokio Life Insurance Company Limited, 6^th Floor, SCO No.16-17, Fortune Chambers, Feroze Gandhi Market, Ludhiana-141001 through its Branch Manager.

2. Edelweiss Tokio Life Insurance Company Limited, S.C.O. No.101, 102 & 103, 2^nd floor, Batra Building, Sector 17-D, Chandigarh-160017 through its Managing Director/Director/General Manager/Authorized Signatory.

3.Edelweiss Tokio Life Insurance Company Limited, having its registered office at Edelweiss House, Off.CST Road, Kalina, Mumbai-400098, through its Managing Director/Director/General Manager/Authorized signatory.

                                                                                                                                                                                                           …..Opposite parties

 

          Complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

QUORUM:

SH. K.K. KAREER, PRESIDENT

SH. JASWINDER SINGH, MEMBER

 

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

For complainant            :         Sh.Harvinder Pal Singh, Advocate

For OPs                         :         Sh. V.S.Mand, Advocate

 

ORDER

PER K.K. KAREER, PRESIDENT

1.                Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that the husband of the complainant namely Manjeet Singh purchased a policy bearing No.004509633E which was issued by the OPs on 07.01.2015. The complainant was the nominee/beneficiary in the said policy. After purchasing the policy, unfortunately Manjeet Singh fell ill and was hospitalized at Kular Hospital, G.T.Road, Bija from 29.12.2015 onwards. Manjeet Singh ultimately died on 20.01.2018. During this period, no intimation was given by the OPs to deposit any further installment. Under the circumstances, the installments of the policy could not be paid. After the death of Manjeet Singh, the complainant informed the OPs about his death and submitted original insurance policy along with relevant documents with the OP1 but the OP1 vide letter dated 13.01.2018 repudiated the claim saying that OP1 informed the complainant through letter dated 07.08.2015 which was never received by the complainant or her husband as at that time the complainant Manjeet Singh was seriously ill. In the given circumstances, the complainant is entitled for the claim of Rs.1 lac on account of death of her husband Manjeet Singh. Non-payment of the claim by the OPs amounts to deficiency of service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. Hence the complaint whereby it has been requested that the OPs be directed to pay the claim of Rs.1 lac along with compensation of Rs.50,000/- and the payments be made with penal interest @19% per annum.

2.                The complaint has been resisted by the OPs. In the joint written statement filed on behalf of OP1 and OP3, it has been, inter alia, pleaded that the complaint is false and frivolous and the same is liable to be dismissed. According to the OPs, the deceased life assured Manjeet Singh paid the first premium of the policy on 07.01.2015. OP company via renewal reminder notice dated 12.06.2015 reminded the life assured to pay the premium due on 07.07.2015. However, deceased life assured failed to pay the same due to which the policy lapsed as per the terms and conditions of the policy. The deceased life assured was further informed of the policy acquiring a lapsed status vide letter dated 07.08.2015. Thus, the policy was in lapsed status as on the date of death of Manjeet Singh i.e.19.08.2017. Therefore, as per the terms and conditions of the policy, no amount was payable. The rest of the averments made in the complaint have been denied as wrong and a prayer for dismissal of the complaint has also been made.

3.                In evidence, complainant submitted her affidavit Ex.CA along with documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C3 and closed the evidence.

4.                 On the other hand, OPs submitted affidavit Ex.RA of Sh.Ankur Chadha, Head-Legal of OPs along with documents Ex.OP-1/1 to Ex.OP-1/5 and closed the evidence. Further, counsel for the OPs had suffered statement that written statement be read as evidence of OPs.

5.                We have heard the arguments advanced by the counsel for the parties and have also gone through records as well as written arguments submitted by the OPs.

6.                Admittedly, the husband of the complainant namely Manjeet Singh obtained a policy on 31.12.2014 and the said policy was issued by the OPs on 07.01.2015. It is also not disputed that Manjeet Singh paid just one premium in respect of the policy and after 07.07.2015 when the next premium became due, which was not paid, the policy lapsed. As per the policy schedule, the term of the policy was 20 years and the premium payment term was 15 years. The premium was payable semi-annually and six monthly installment was Rs.9942.50P. Manjeet Singh paid just one premium of Rs.9942.50P plus service tax and thereafter, he did not pay any premium. As per death certificate Ex.C2, Manjeet Singh died on 19.08.2017. As per the policy terms and conditions, there is a grace period of 30 days in case the premium is not paid in time and the benefit of the policy can be obtained during the grace period. As per clause 3(c) of the policy, if the default in payment of premium occurs during the first 2 policy years and if the premium due under the policy is not received in full within the grace period, the policy shall immediately and automatically lapse and no benefit shall be payable under the policy. Therefore, it is evident that the policy had lapsed by the time Manjeet Singh died and as per the terms and conditions of the policy, no claim or benefit is payable on the lapsed policy.

7.                As a result of above discussion, the complaint fails and the same is hereby dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Copies of order be supplied to parties free of costs as per rules. File be indexed and consigned to record room.         

8.                Due to rush of work and spread of COVID-19, the case could not be decided within statutory period.

 

                             (Jaswinder Singh)                            (K.K. Kareer)

                    Member                                           President

 

Announced in Open Commission.

Dated:05.04.2022.

Gurpreet Sharma