Haryana

Karnal

CC/325/2018

Kartik Gandhi - Complainant(s)

Versus

LIC Of India - Opp.Party(s)

06 Sep 2019

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL.

 

                                                       Complaint No.325 of 2018

                                                         Date of instt. 22.11.2018

                                                         Date of decision:06.09.2019

 

Kartik Gandhi son of Shri Yashpal Gandhi resident of 39 Jernailly Colony, Karnal, phone no.8950122320, Aadhaar no.505814365760.

                                                                      

…….Complainant

                                                  Versus

 

LIC of India (Branch code 17B), having its registered office at sector 12 Karnal.

                                                                       .…..Opposite Party.

 

           Complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act. 

         

Before    Sh. Jaswant Singh……President. 

                Sh. Vineet Kaushik………Member

                Dr. Rekha Chaudhary……Member

 

 Present:  Complainant in person.

                   Shri Anuj Gupta Advocate for opposite party.

 

                   (Jaswant Singh President)

ORDER:                    

 

                        This complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 on the averments that complainant purchased a life insurance policy bearing policy no.178169522 from OP(branch code 17B) on 30.06.2017 for a sum of Rs.2708/-. On 02.11.2018 the policy bond was delivered to the complainant and speed post sticker bearing no.RH626225002IN for receiving of the policy bond. Complainant sent the mail regarding “Free Look of the Policy” dated 05.11.2018 to the OP. However, the OP made no efforts to reply back and got shocked to know that 17B code is registered at 5 Saint Nagar Karnal as per IRDA and LIC of India online portal/website.  OP is liable for breach of contract as it has not complied with the terms and conditions of the policy bond and has acted extremely negligently in attending to the complaint of the complainant, therefore, complainant is liable to compensate the complainant for the loss and injury caused to him.

2.             Notice of the complaint was given to the OP, who appeared and filed written version raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; locus standi; cause of action; jurisdiction and concealment of true and material facts. On merits, it is pleaded that the complainant has introduced all the six policies himself under his agency code 0407517B and completed all required formalities. The details of the policies are as under:

Police No.              DOC                      T&T             SA                         Premium

178169513           28.06.2017           843-20        75,000/-               2708

178169515           10.06.2017           827-20        75,000/-               2617

178169518           25.06.2017           843-20        75,000/-               2708

178169521           20.06.2017           843-20        75,000/-               2708

178169522           15.06.2017           843-20        75,000/-               2708

178169525           28.06.2017           827-20        75,000/-               2617

 

Being policies were introduced by complainant as an agent himself in his agency and recruited as stipendiary agent under “City Career Agent”, LIC has paid an amount of Rs.6000/- as stipend and prescribed commission to the complainant. It is further pleaded that all the policies bonds were handed over by Branch Office on 13.11.2017 to the concerned Development Officer Shri Rajesh Sharma, under whom supervision complainant was working as an stipendiary agent and policies were in the name of agent himself but he has not received the policies from concerned development officer after regular follow up by phone calls & visit to his residence and informed his development officer to sent the policies by post as confirmed by concerned development officer vide his letter dated 15.02.2019. Ultimately, the policies to the Life Assured/Agent were sent on 30.10.2018. All the policies have been received by the policy holder on 2.11.2018 as alleged. It is further pleaded that complainant himself was/is the agent of the policy and he was fully aware about the terms and conditions of the free look period. As per version of the complainant, he has received the policy in question on 2.11.2018 and for availing the free look period he was under obligation to submit his claim with the OP within 15 days alongwith original policy bond, original premium receipt, certificate for not availing the income tax rebate, ID proof, particulars of bank account and reasons for free look alongwith self signed application. But complainant sent a vague unsigned email on for cooling of the above policies, which was replied by OP through email dated 14.01.2019 and requested the complainant to submit his claim with the OP within 15 days but complainant has not submitted his claim with the OP alongwith requisite documents within specific time period and thus he is not entitled to any relief as claimed for. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.             Complainant tendered into evidence his affidavit Ex.CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C10 and closed the evidence on 09.05.2019.

4.             On the other hand, OP tendered into evidence affidavit of Puneet Kumar Ex.OPW1/A and documents Ex.OP1 to Ex.OP11 and closed the evidence on 7.8.2019.

5.             We have appraised the evidence on record, the material circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties.

6.             The case of the complainant, in brief, is that complainant purchased a life insurance policy bearing policy no.178169522 from OP on 30.06.2017 for payment premium a sum of Rs.2708/-. On 02.11.2018 the policy bond was delivered to the complainant. Complainant sent the mail regarding “Free Look of the Policy” dated 05.11.2018 to the OP. However, the OP made no efforts to reply back and not cancel the policy.  OP is liable for breach of contract as it has not complied with the terms and conditions of the policy bond and has acted extremely negligently in attended to the complaint of the complainant, therefore, complainant is liable to compensate the complainant for the loss and injury caused to him. The complainant also submitted the written version.

7.             The case of the OP is that complainant has introduced all the six policies himself under his agency code 0407517B and completed all required formalities. Complainant as an agent himself in his agency and recruited as stipendiary agent under “City Career Agent”, LIC has paid an amount of Rs.6000/- as stipend and prescribed commission to the complainant. All the policies bonds were handed over by Branch Office on 13.11.2017 to the concerned Development Officer Shri Rajesh Sharma, under whom supervision complainant was working as an stipendiary agent and policies were in the name of agent himself but he has not received the policies from concerned development officer after regular follow up by phone calls & visit to his residence and informed his development officer to sent the policies by post as confirmed by concerned development officer vide his letter dated 15.02.2019. Ultimately, the policies to the Life Assured/Agent were sent on 30.10.2018. All the policies have been received by the policy holder on 2.11.2018 as alleged. Complainant himself was/is the agent of the policy and he was fully aware about the terms and conditions of the free look period. As per version of the complainant, he has received the policy in question on 2.11.2018 and for availing the free look period he was under obligation to submit his claim with the OP within 15 days alongwith original policy bond, original premium receipt, certificate for not availing the income tax rebate, ID proof, particulars of bank account and reasons for free look alongwith self signed application. But complainant sent a vague unsigned email on for cooling of the above policies, which was replied by OP through email dated 14.01.2019 and requested the complainant to submit his claim with the OP within 15 days but complainant has not submitted his claim with the OP alongwith requisite documents within specific time period and thus he is not entitled to any relief.

8.             On 29.06.2017 the complainant was recruited as stipendiary agent under “City Career Agents” Scheme under supervision of Rajesh Sharma, Development Officer of LIC. This fact has been proved from the policy form Ex.OP1, where the occupation of the complainant has been shown as Royal MKG & LIC Agent. As per city career agent scheme, proper training and knowledge of products were imparted to the complainant at the time of recruitment. As per scheme, a stipend of Rs.6000/- per months will be given to city career agent on procurement of life insurance on one live. As an agent, complainant himself was fully aware about the terms and conditions of the policy. The complainant also aware about the procedure of Free Look Period. Free Look Period is reproduced as under:_

“Free Look Period: If the policy holder is not satisfied with the “Terms and Conditions” of the policy, he/she may return the policy to the Corporation within 15 days from the date of receipt of the policy stating the reasons of objections i.e. only the policy holder or proposer has the right to review the terms and conditions of the policy.”

9              As per version of the complainant, he has received the policy in question on 2.11.2018. For availing the freelook period the complainant was under obligation to submit his claim with the OP within 15 days alongwith original policy bond, original first premium receipt, certificate for not availing the income tax rebate, ID proof, particulars of NEFT details and reasons for free look period mentioned in self signed application but the complainant failed to submit his claim with the OP within prescribed period.

10.            The LIC has paid an amount of Rs.6000/- as stipend to the complainant. As per the version of the OP, all the policies bonds were handed over by Branch office on 13.11.2017 to the Development Officer Shri Rajesh Sharma, under whom supervision the complainant was working as an stipendiary agent, but complainant did not collect the policies from development officer after regular follow up by phone calls & visit to the house of the complainant. This facts has been proved from the letter Ex.OP11 written by Development Officer Rajesh Sharma to Sr. Branch Manager LIC Karnal. Thus, the complainant has failed to apply for cancellation of the policy within free look period.

11.            As per version of the complainant, the policy in question has not sent by OP, on repeated request. After receipt the policy, the complainant applied for cancellation of the policy, in this regard he sent his request through the email. Said e-mail has been replied by the OP, vide Ex.OP10. According to Ex.OP10, the complainant was advised to apply for free look, in writing, alongwith specific reason for free look, alongwith original policy bond, original premium receipt, certificate for not availing the income tax rebate under these policies, ID proof and bank particulars and on receipt of these requirements, action will be initiated as per rule.

12.            As per above reply sent by OP to the complainant, OP is willing and ready for decide the claim of the complainant. Thus, in these circumstances, at the stage, the act of the OP is not amounts to deficient.

13.            Thus, as a sequel to abovesaid discussion, we dispose of the complaint of the complainant with the liberty to the complainant to fulfill the requirements mentioned in Ex.OP10 and OP will consider the claim of the complainant as per terms and conditions of the policy. This order shall be complied with accordingly. No order as to costs. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced

Dated:06.09.2019

                                                                   President,

                                                           District Consumer Disputes

                                                           Redressal Forum, Karnal.  

 

(Vineet Kaushik)          (Dr. Rekha Chaudhary)

              Member                                 Member