Heard learned counsel for the appellants. None appears for the respondent.

2.      Here is an appeal filed u/s 15 of the erstwhile Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter called the ‘Act’). Parties to this appeal shall be referred to with reference to their respective status before the District Forum.

3.   The unfolded story of the case of the complainant is that the complainant has purchased LIC policy bearing No. 598120286 from OP No.1 with sum assured of Rs.1,40,000/-. The period of such policy commenced from 9.2.2011 to 9.2.2016. Complainant alleged inter alia that on the date of maturity she was entitled to get Rs.1,25,000/- but she was only paid Rs.68,125/-. Since  assured amount was not paid, she filed the complaint for rest of the amount.

4.      OP Nos. 1 and 2 filed written version stating that the complainant is entitled to what has been settled. It is averred in the written version that the sum assured is only payable on the death of the policy holder but since in this case, the policy holder is alive, she is only entitled to the amount of premium deposited in his account. So she was  paid  Rs.68,125/-. Therefore, there is no any deficiency of service on their part.

5.      After hearing both parties, the learned District Forum passed the following impugned order:-

                             “xxx  xxx  xxx

            The complaint is and the same be allowed on contest against the OPs. The OP No.1 & 2 are hereby directed to credit Rs.71,825/- to the SB Account of the complainant, the  balance maturity value after deducting Rs.68,125/- which has already been credited to the complainant’s account from the total amount of Rs.1,40,000/-. The OP No.1 & 2 are directed to pay Rs.5000/- towards mental agony and Rs.500/- for the cost of litigation to the complainant within 30 days from the date of passing of this order. The OP No. 3 has been exempted from all the liabilities awarded by this Forum as he is no way connected with the monetary transactions.”

6.      Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the learned District Forum has committed error in law by not considering the real terms and conditions of the policy. According to him, the policy condition is very clear to show that the maturity amount is payable equal to premium paid if insured is alive. Therefore, he submitted to set aside the impugned order by allowing the appeal.

7.      Considered the submission of learned counsel for the appellants and perused the DFR including the impugned order.

8.      It is for the complainant to prove the deficiency of service on the part of the OPs.

9.      It is admitted fact that the complainant  has purchased the policy BIMA Account 1/II from OP No.1 for sum assured of Rs.1,40,000/-. The span of the policy was from 9.2.2011 to 9.2.2016. It is admitted by the complainant that she has paid Rs.68,125/- which was credited to her SB account. Now question arises whether she is entitled to Rs.1,40,000/- or the premium  amount paid by her.

10.    The policy condition is very clear to show that the sum assured would be available in case of death of the policy holder but in the case of the maturity amount during life time of the insured would be same as the premium already paid. It is not  in issue that the complainant has purchased the policy for a period of five years. During life time, the policy matured and as per the policy condition she is entitled to the premium amount paid i.e. Rs.68,125/-. In this regard, the table showing the deduction or addition to the concerned amount is filed. It appears that the OP has deducted certain expense charges but those sum are also deductable under the policy. Therefore, the complainant is entitled to Rs.68,125/- which has already been paid.

11.    In view of aforesaid discussion, this Commission is of the view that the learned District Forum has not applied the judicial mind to the facts and law which is liable to be set aside.

12.    The appeal stands allowed. No cost.

         DFR be sent back forthwith.

         Supply free copy of this order to the respective parties or the copy of this order be downloaded from Confonet or Website of this Commission to treat same as copy supplied from this Commission.