Haryana

Karnal

CC/5/2021

Shiv Dayal - Complainant(s)

Versus

Shri ram Life Insurance Company Limited - Opp.Party(s)

Anuj Chauhan

12 Apr 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.

 

                                                        Complaint No. 05 of 2021

                                                        Date of instt.04.01.2021

                                                        Date of Decision:12.04.2024

 

Shiv Dayal son of Shri Hardeep Singh, resident of village and post office Tikri, tehsil and District Karnal. Aadhar no.4452 6487 9187. Mobile no.9896801496.

                                                                        …….Complainant.

                                              Versus

 

1. Shriram Life Insurance Company Ltd. # 780/7, near Tau Devi Lal shopping complex, Panipat, Haryana, through its Branch Manager.

 

2. Shriram Life Insurance Company Ltd. registered office at Shriram Life Insurance Company Limited, 5^th floor, plot no.31-32, Ramky Selenium, Financial District Gachibowli, beside Andhra Bank, Training Centre, Hyderabad-500032 Telangana, India, through its Senior Manager CEO/MD/Authorized signatory.

 

                                                                        …..Opposite Parties.

 

Complaint under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

 

Before   Sh. Jaswant Singh……President.      

      Sh. Vineet Kaushik…….Member

      Dr.  Suman Singh…..Member

 

 Argued by: Shri Anuj Chauhan, counsel for the complainant.

                    Shri Rishi Pal Rana, counsel for the OPs.

 

                     (Jaswant Singh, President)

ORDER:   

                

                The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred to as ‘OPs’) on the averments that on the allurements of the representative of OPs, on 28.05.2016 complainant purchased a Shriram New Shri Life Plan from the OPs by paying premium of Rs.12,999/-, vide receipt dated 20.05.2016. The details of the said insurance policy are as under:-

Proposal number	543616000076
Policy number	NP131605013724
Customer ID	S001085815
Sum Assured	Rs.93,000/-
Policy Term	15 years
Date of Commencement	28.05.2016
Premium Paying term	10 years
Premium Paying Frequency	Yearly
Maturity Date	28.05.2031
Last Premium Date	28.05.2025

 

It is further alleged that during continuance of the said policy the complainant further deposited an amount of Rs.12,664/- in the company of the OPs, vide receipt dated 01.06.2017. Complainant later on came to know that out of premium amount deposited by the complainant, OPs had purchased three Individual Personal Accident Policy of United India Insurance Company in the name of his father, brother and mother, even without getting consent of the complainant. The OPs have misused the signature of the complainant. As the representative of the OPs at the time of signing the proposal form got signatures of the complainant on number of printed unfilled papers, even without explaining the details of those papers. Due to this act and conduct of OPs, complainant requested the OP no.1 for termination of insurance policy and for refund of the money deposited by him but OPs did not pay any heed to the request of the complainant. Then complainant sent a legal notice dated 09.11.2020 to the OPs. After receipt of the said notice, OP no.2 has sent a reply dated 04.12.2020 on the basis of factitious and vexatious grounds and has refused to admit the claim of complainant. In this way there is deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. Hence complainant filed the present complaint.

2.             On notice, OPs appeared and filed its written version raising preliminary objections with regard to maintainability; cause of action; locus standi and concealment of true and material facts. On merits, it is pleaded that complainant approached the OP for a life insurance policy by submitting a proposal form dated 28.05.2016 and by paying the proposal deposit amount. After underwriting the proposal, a policy was issued by the OPs covering the life of the complainant Mr. Shiv Dayal, vide policy no.NP131605013724 under the Plan “Shri Ram New Shri Life Plan” which has commenced from 28.05.2016 for a term of 15 years for  sum assured amount of Rs.93000/- with annual renewal premium of Rs.12,879/- payable for a period of 10 years. The policy was generated and the entire policy documents containing First Premium Receipt, policy schedule, terms and conditions was dispatched to the communication address of the policyholder alongwith a covering letter which was duly received by the policyholder. It is further pleaded that the annual renewal premium under the policy was due on 28.05.2017 which was not paid by the policyholder even after sending automated reminders to him, hence the policy lapsed on 28.05.2017 due to non-payment of the annual renewal premium. If the renewal premium is not paid the policy will lapse. In such circumstances, the policy holder can revive the policy within two years from the date of first unpaid installment by paying all the dues and fulfilling the required formalities. The complainant/policy holder requested for revival of the policy in March, 2018 by paying the due renewal premium, which was accepted and the policy was revived. After revival of the policy, the complainant /policy holder again failed to pay the renewal premium, which was due on 28.05.2018 even on sending automated reminders. Hence, the policy is in lapsed status since 28.05.2018. It is further pleaded that OPs did not receive any request for revival of the lapsed policy except the legal notice dated 09.11.2020 i.e. after the lapse of more than two years from the date of revival of the policy. The conduct of the policy holder who was silent for more than 4 years from the date of issuance of policy and 2 years from the date of revival of the policy. It is further pleaded that OP has covered the risk on the life of the policyholder for assured amount of Rs.93,000/- under the policy till the completion of second year from the commencement date and thereafter, due to non-payment of the renewal premium, the said life insurance policy is in lapsed status. As such, the OP has covered the risk of life of the complainant and would have paid the assured amount under the policy to the nominee/beneficiary in case of any unfortunate event. Hence, having enjoyed the benefits under the said life insurance policy for the first two years, the complainant/policy holder cannot ask for refund of the premium paid under the said life insurance policy, which is utilized by the ‘op company for covering the risk on life of complainant/policyholder for a period of two years. There is no deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs. The other allegations made in the complaint have been denied and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

3.             Parties then led their respective evidence.

4.             Learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.CW1/A, copy of aadhar card of complainant Ex.C1, copy of proposal form Ex.C2, copy of detail regarding benefit illustration for Shriram New Life Insurance Ex.C3, copy of deposit slip dated 20.05.2016 Ex.C4, copy of cash slips dated 20.05.2016 and 01.06.2017 Ex.C5 and Ex.C6, copy of first premium receipt dated 28.05.2016 Ex.C7, copy of premium adjustment receipt dated 10.04.2018 Ex.C8, copy of individual personal accident policy schedule Ex.C9 to Ex.C11, copy of legal notice dated 09.11.2020 Ex.C12, postal receipts Ex.C13 and Ex.C14 and closed the evidence on 10.01.2023 by suffering separate statement.

5.             On the other hand, learned counsel for the OPs has tendered into evidence affidavit of Ravi Sharma Assistant Manager Ex.OPW1/A, copy of proposal from Ex.OP1, copy of legal notice Ex.OP2, copy of reply of legal notice Ex.OP3, copy of premium receipt dated 01.06.2017 Ex.OP4, copy of first premium deposit slip dated 20.05.2016 Ex.OP5, copy of reminder notice dated 12.06.2018 Ex.OP6 and closed the evidence on 31.08.2023 by suffering separate statement.

6.             We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file carefully and have also gone through the evidence led by the parties.

7.             Learned counsel for complainant, while reiterating the contents of the complaint, has vehemently argued that on 28.05.2016, complainant purchased a Shriram New Shri Life Plan from the OPs by paying a premium of Rs.12,999/-. In continuation of the policy, complainant further deposited an amount of Rs.12,664/- with the OPs, vide receipt dated 01.06.2017. He further argued that due to illegal act of the OPs, complainant does not want to continue the policy in question, so complainant requested the OPs to refunds of premium amount deposited by him but OPs refused to pay the same and lastly prayed for allowing the complaint.

8.             Per contra, learned counsel for the OPs, while reiterating the contents of written version, has vehemently argued that on 28.05.2016, complainant purchased a “Shri Ram New Shri Life Plan” from the OPs for a terms of 15 years and sum assured was Rs.93000/- The mode of premium was annual for a period of 10 years. The complainant did not pay the premium amount which was due on 28.05.2017 so, the policy lapsed on 28.05.2017 due to non-payment of the premium. The complainant requested for revival of the policy in March, 2018 by paying the due renewal premium, which was accepted by the OPs and the policy was revived. After revival of the policy, the complainant again failed to pay the renewal premium, which was due on 28.05.2018. So, the policy is in lapsed status since 28.05.2018. He further argued that OP has covered the risk on the life of the policyholder for assured amount of Rs.93,000/- under the policy till the completion of second year from the commencement date and thereafter, due to non-payment of the renewal premium, the said policy is in lapsed status. The OP has covered the risk of the life of the complainant and in case of any unfortunate incident, the OPs ought to have paid the benefit under the policy. Thus, the complainant enjoyed the benefits under the said policy for the first two years, so he is not entitled  for refund of the premium paid under the said life insurance policy, which is utilized by the OPs company for covering the risk on life of complainant/policyholder for a period of two years. He further argued that OPs have not purchased three other policies from United India Insurance Company as alleged by the complainant and OPs have no concerned with the said policies and lastly prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

9.             We have duly considered the rival contentions of the parties.

10.           Admittedly, on 28.05.2016, the complainant purchased the policy in question and the term of the policy was 15 years. It is also admitted that the sum assured under the policy was Rs.93,000/- and mode of payment was yearly. It is also admitted that only two premiums were paid by the complainant.

11.           Complainant has alleged that due to illegal act of the OPs, complainant does not want to continue the policy in question and requested the OPs for refund of Rs.25,654/- i.e. premiums deposited by him but OPs did not pay the same despite of repeated requests. The complainant has not placed on file copies of the three policies purchased by OPs from the United India Insurance Company as alleged by him.  The complainant purchased the policy in question on 28.05.2016 and next premium was due on 28.05.2017 which was deposited by the complainant, vide receipt Ex.C5 dated 01.06.2017. The next renewal premium was due in 28.05.2018 and the said premium was not deposited by the complainant and policy is moved into lapse mode since 28.05.2018 for non-payment of premium amounts. The complainant enjoyed the benefits under the said policy for the first two years and OPs have covered the risk on the life of complainant for that period. Complainant himself failed to deposit the next premium amount. Thus, in view of the above, complainant is not entitled for any claim amount as alleged by him.

12.           Thus, as a sequel of above discussion, the present complaint is devoid of merit and deserves to be dismissed and same is hereby dismissed. 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:12.04.2024.                                                                   

                                                                President,

                                                   District Consumer Disputes

                                                   Redressal Commission, Karnal.

       

                  (Vineet Kaushik)              (Dr. Suman Singh)

               Member                             Member