Haryana

Kaithal

CC/176/2022

Sanjeev - Complainant(s)

Versus

Life Insurance Corporation Of India Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Sh.Raschit Gupta

14 May 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KAITHAL

 

                                                               Complaint Case No. 176 of 2022.

                                                               Date of institution:   14.07.2022.

                                                               Date of decision:      14.05.2024.

 

Sanjeev s/o Shri Amar Nath, r/o H.No.D7, Judicial Colony, Sector-19, HUDA, Kaithal.

                                                                                      …Complainant.

                                                       Versus

 

1. Life Insurance Corporation of India Ltd., Kaithal, through its Manager, old Tehsil Road, near Geeta Bhawan Mandir, Kaithal.
2. Sushil Makkar, Life Insurance Advisor, Opposite LIC Office, old Tehsil Road, near Geeta Bhawan Mandir, Kaithal.

...Opposite Parties.

 

          Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act

 

CORAM:   SMT. NEELAM KASHYAP, PRESIDENT.

                   SMT. SUMAN RANA, MEMBER.

                   SHRI SUNIL MOHAN TRIKHA, MEMBER.

 

Present:       Shri Sanjeev Kumar Gupta, Advocate for the complainant.

                   Shri Sudeep Malik, Advocate for Opposite Party No.1.

                   Shri Vishal Digani, Advocate for Opposite Party No.2.

                  

ORDER  -  NEELAM KASHYAP, PRESIDENT

          Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019, against the OPs.

2.                It is alleged in the complaint by the complainant that OP No.2 persuaded him for buying LIC Jeevan Saral Policy No.177803626 commencing from 15.02.2012 for 25 years bearing Talika No.165 stating that he can continue the said policy by paying the premium after 3 years, he can surrender the policy and shall get the maturity amount along with premium already paid. That he invested in the said policy after paying first premium on 17.02.2012 i.e. Rs.24020/- on yearly basis and thereafter, paid the regular premium consecutively till February 2022. That after making the premium amount on yearly basis for 11 years, he had applied for surrender value of the policy in February 2022 and demanded the amount of Rs.5,00,203/- as assured by OP No.2 and in this regard approached the OPs, but on 25.02.2022, OPs stated showing surrender value of Rs.3,49,868/-. That he duly served a notice dated 19.04.2022 through registered post dated 20.04.2022 to OPs, which was replied by OP No.1 vide reply dated 09.05.2022, wherein, assured surrender value of Rs.5,00,203/- has been denied. That the above act and conduct of OPs, amounts to clear cut deficiency in service, on their part, due to which, he suffered huge physical harassment, mental agony and financial loss, constraining him, to file the present complaint, against the OPs, before this Commission.

3.                Upon notice of complaint, OPs appeared before this Commission and filed their respective written statements

4.                OP No.1, in its written statement stated that the complainant is well within the knowledge of terms and conditions of the policy and as per condition No.14 of Proposal Form, the complainant had answered in positive. That Jeevan Saral was introduced on 16.02.2004. That in the event of the Life Assured surviving the date of maturity a sum equal to Maturity Sum Assured in force after partial surrenders, if any along with the corresponding loyalty addition, if any, shall be payable. That as per the plan features, in case at least 10 years premiums have been paid under the policy and the policy has been in force for at least 10 years, then policy holder is also eligible to get the loyalty additions for the complete duration for which the premiums have been paid. That the complainant has obtained the policy and paid perineum to avail these two different claim related benefits (1) Risk cover for Death during term of policy i.e. Death Sum Assured and (2) If he survives throughout the Term, maturity benefit, i.e. maturity Sum Assured at the end of term of policy. In the case in hand, the policy holder has purchased the policy and paid premium to avail two claim benefits i.e. (1) Life cover for death Sum Assured (2) Maturity Sum Assured and he has taken full benefit of the life cover benefit during the last 11 years of policy, and therefore, now the policy holder cannot demand full maturity amount by way of surrender.

5.                To prove the case, complainant tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.CW1/A alongwith documents Annexure-C1 to Annexure-C12.

6.                On the other hand, OP No.1 tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.RW1/A and documents Annexure R-1 to R-3. OP No.2 failed to lead any evidence, despite availing various opportunities, as such, evidence of OP No.2 was closed by the order of this Commission on 11.01.2024.

7.                OP No.2 did not file separate written statement, rather, suffered a statement that written statement filed by OP No.1 may be read as such, on the part of OP No.2.

8.                We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully.

9.                Learned counsel for the complainant has argued that the complainant invested with OP No.1, after paying first premium on 17.02.2012 i.e. Rs.24020/- on yearly basis and thereafter, paid the regular premium consecutively till February 2022. He further argued that at the time of purchasing the said policy, OP No.2 persuaded the complainant he can continue the said policy by paying the premium and after 3 years, he can surrender the policy and shall get the maturity amount along with premium already paid. He further argued that after making the premium amount on yearly basis for 11 years, the complainant had applied for surrender value of the policy in February 2022 and demanded the amount of Rs.5,00,203/- as assured by OP No.2 and in but on 25.02.2022, OPs stated showing surrender value of Rs.3,49,868/-. He further argued that the above act and conduct of OPs, amounts to clear cut deficiency in service, on their part.

10.              On the other hand, learned counsel for OP No.1 has argued that Jeevan Saral was introduced on 16.02.2004. He further argued that in the event of the Life Assured surviving the date of maturity a sum equal to Maturity Sum Assured in force after partial surrenders, if any along with the corresponding loyalty addition, if any, shall be payable. He further argued that as per the plan features, in case at least 10 years premiums have been paid under the policy and the policy has been in force for at least 10 years, then policy holder is also eligible to get the loyalty additions for the complete duration for which the premiums have been paid. He further argued that the complainant has obtained the policy and paid perineum to avail these two different claim related benefits (1) Risk cover for Death during term of policy i.e. Death Sum Assured and (2) If he survives throughout the Term, maturity benefit, i.e. maturity Sum Assured at the end of term of policy. He further argued that in the case in hand, the policy holder has purchased the policy and paid premium to avail two claim benefits i.e. (1) Life cover for death Sum Assured (2) Maturity Sum Assured and he has taken full benefit of the life cover benefit during the last 11 years of policy, and therefore, now the policy holder cannot demand full maturity amount by way of surrender. He further argued that as per terms and conditions of policy and rules/regulations of OPs, surrender value under the policy as on 07.09.2022 is Rs.3,58,224/-.

11.              Admittedly, the complainant invested with OP No.1 in LIC Jeevan Saral Policy bearing No.177803626 bearing Talika No.165 for 25 years, commencing from 15.02.2012 till 15.02.2037 with yearly premium of Rs.24020/- and the maturity sum assured of Rs.6,17,080/- and death sum assured was Rs.5,00,000/-, vide policy document Annexure C-1. It is also admitted fact that after making the premium amount, on yearly basis for 11 years Annexure C-4, the complainant applied for surrender value of the policy in February 2022 with OP No.1.

12.              Learned counsel for the complainant has alleged that after surrender of the policy in question in 11^th year, the surrender value comes to Rs.5,00,203/-, whereas, contrary to it, learned counsel for the OPs has contended that as per terms and conditions of policy and rules/regulations of OPs, surrender value under the policy as on 07.09.2022 is Rs.3,58,224/-, vide document Annexure R-3.

13.              In order to support his above contentions, complainant had drawn attention of this Commission towards document Annexure C-5, which is LIC’s Jeevan Saral A.T.M. Plan and from this document, it is found that in 11^th year, if one person is paying premium of Rs.2000/- per month, then the surrender value comes to Rs.500203/-. In the case in hand, complainant is also paying premium amount of Rs.24020/- per year i.e. about Rs.2000/- per month, as such, after continuation of policy for 11 years, after surrender the policy, the surrender value comes to Rs.500203/-. However, to go deeper into this case, this Commission has searched the “LIC Jeevan Saral Policy Talika No.165” on the internet and we have found one document with details of said plan and taken the printout of the same and marked the same as Mark-A on the case file. However, in this document Mark-A, the surrender value in 11^th year under Rs.2000/- premium, is Rs.500203/-, which is the same as in the document Annexure C-5, produced by the complainant, on the case file. So, from both the documents i.e. Annexure C-5 and Mark-A, it is crystal clear that after surrender of policy in question in 11^th year, the surrender value comes to Rs.500203/-, but contrary to it, OP No.1 has offered Rs.3,58,224/- on 07.09.2022, to the complainant, against Rs.500203/- i.e. less amount of Rs.141979/-, which amounts to deficiency in service on the part of OP No.1, due to which, the complainant might have suffered huge physical harassment, mental agony as well as financial, due to no fault on his part and when OP No.1 did not hear him, then the complainant left with no other option except to knock the door of this Commission, by way of filing the complaint in hand after paying the additional amount to his counsel. Hence, OP No.1, for its above act of deficiency in service, not only liable to pay the surrender value of Rs.500203/-, to the complainant, but also liable to pay the compensation amount with litigation expenses, to the complainant. However, it is pertinent to mention here that OP No.2 merely works as agent of OP No.1 and he (OP No.2) has no direct concern with the matter in question, which only relates to the complainant and OP No.1, who offered lesser amount to the complainant. Moreover, OP No.2 is not liable for any wrong act, done by OP No.1, being its agent. Hence, complaint qua OP No.2 is liable to be dismissed.

14.              Thus as a sequel of above discussion, we accept the present complaint against OP No.1 and dismiss the same against OP No.2. We direct OP No.1 to pay surrender value of Rs.500203/- along with compensation amount of Rs.5000/- + litigation expenses of Rs.5000/-, to the complainant, within a period of 45 days, from today, failing which, the total award amount shall carry interest @ 6% p.a., from the date of filing of present complaint, till its realization.

15.              In default of compliance of this order, proceedings shall be initiated under Section 72 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019, as non-compliance of Court order shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one month, but which may extend to three years, or with fine, which shall not be less than twenty five thousand rupees, but which may extend to one lakh rupees, or with both. A copy of this order be sent to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to the records, after due compliance.     

Announced in open Commission:

Dt.:14.05.2024.

                                                                                      (Neelam Kashyap)

                                                                                       President.

 

(Sunil Mohan Trikha).             (Suman Rana).              

Member.                                  Member.

 

 

 

 

Typed by: Sham Kalra, SSS.