IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, ALAPPUZHA
Thursday the 31st day of August, 2017
Filed on 28.12.2013
Present
1. Smt. Elizabeth George (President)
2. Sri. Antony Xavier (Member)
3. Smt. Jasmine D (Member)
in
CC/No.178/2016
Between
Complainants:- Opposite party:-
Sri. Vasudevan Pillai.P.R 1. The C.E.O
Varun Nivas Bajaj Allianz Insurance
Avalookkunnu.P.O company Ltd.
Alappuzha G.E, Plaza, Airport Road
Yerwada, Pune
Maharashtra-411006
2. The Manager
Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance
Company Ltd
Branch Office, Alleppy
Avenue Centre Beach Road
Near Kannanvarkey Bridge
Alleppey-688 001
O R D E R
SMT. ELIZABETH GEORGE (PRESIDENT)
The case of the complainant is as follows:-
The complainant had availed an insurance policy from the opposite parties. He had been make to believe by the opposite party that after paying 3 instalments by premium a total sum assured will be given to the complainant after the expiry of the policy period. Believing their assurance complainant paid 3 instalments of Rs. 10,000/- each on 7/2/2007, 7/2/2008, 7/2/2009 and Rs.5000/- on 5/2/2010. On march 2016 opposite party sent pay order for Rs. 9950/- to the complainant and also they informed the complainant that the policy is terminated. Opposite party has not sent any letter to the complainant after 5/2/2010. The act of the opposite party is legal and against the terms and conditions. Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties the complaint is filed.
2. Version of the opposite parties are as follows:-
Complaint is not maintainable. It is absolutely false to state that the complainant was induced to join the policy on the promise of assured returns of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty Lakh). The opposite parties have never made any such false promise to complainant. Complainant had paid an amount of Rs.32,500/- only as premium under the policy. As stipulated by policy terms, the insurance coverage to the complainant was continued for two years by levying mortality charges and other charges from the funds under the policy. At the end of the said 2 year period, the complainant had an option to discontinue the insurance cover which was not exercised by him and hence the insurance cover was continued to the complainant by levying necessary charges from the funds under the policy. The policy stipulated that in case the fund value under the policy falls below one annual premium, the contract will be terminated by paying the fund value. Accordingly, the fund value of the policy issued to the complainant fell below one annual premium Rs.10,000/- on 15/2/2016 and immediately thereafter, policy was terminated by these opposite parties and an amount of Rs. 9950/- was paid to the complainant by way of cheque bearing No. 630409 and dated 16/2/2016. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party
3. The complainant was examined as PW1 the documents produced were marked as Ext.A1 to Ext.A4. No oral or documentary evidence produced from the part of the opposite party.
4. According to the complainant he subscribed to a policy of the opposite party commenced on 5/2/2010 and remitted Rs. 10,000/- each towards 3 instalments and remitted Rs.5000/- towards 4th instalments. Opposite party filed version admitting that complainant remitted Rs. 32500/- as premium under the policy. According to the opposite party the policy taken by the complainant is a unit liked policy and is a speculative investment with speculative gain and hence the complainant is not a consumer within the meaning of consumer protection act. They further stated that according to the condition of the policy that the complainant had another 2 years time to revive policy. As stipulated by policy terms, the insurance coverage to the Complainant was continued in the said period of two years by levying mortality charges and other charges from the funds under the policy. At the end of the said 2 years period, the complainant had an option to discontinue the insurance cover which was not exercised by him and hence the insurance cover was continued to the complainant by levying necessary charges from the funds under the policy. The policy stipulated that in case the fund value under the policy falls below one manual premium, the contract will be terminated by paying the fund value. Accordingly, the fund value of the policy issued to the complainant fell below one annual premium, (Rs.10,000/-) on 15/2/2016 and immediately thereafter, Policy was terminated by these opposite parties and amount of Rs. 9,950/- was paid to the complainant by way of cheque bearing No. 630409 and dated 16/2/2016. But the complainant stated that no notice was issued to him from the opposite party demanding the complainant to remit next premium amount. Without any notice the opposite party had taken a decision to terminate the policy of the complainant. There is no documentary evidence or oral evidence produced by the opposite party to prove their contention that the policy having been taken by the complainant for investment of premium amount in share market for speculative game. As per the IRDA (Treatment of Discontinued Linked Insurance Policies) regulation 2010, Regulation 7, obligation of an insurer upon discontinuance of a policy is stated. As sub clause of Regulation 7 the charge levied on the discontinuance, as a percent of one annual premium or fund value on the date of discontinuance and its limits are specified. After three years the maximum discontinuance charge for the policy having annualized premium above Rs. 25,000/- is shown as lower of 3%(AP or FV) the maximum of Rs.4,000/-.” So the opposite party is eligible for the deduction of Rs. 4000/- only.
In our view as per the above the regulation the complainant is entitled to get Rs.28500/-. The failure on part of the opposite party in refunding the amount, amounts to deficiency in service. Since the complainant received Rs. 9950/- he is entitled to receive the amount after deducting Rs.9950/- from Rs.28500/- .
In the result the complaint is allowed opposite parties are directed to refund an amount Rs. 18,550/- (Rupees Eighteen thousand five hundred and fifty only) along with 8% interest per annum from date of the complaint till realization. Since to primary relief is granted there is no order as to compensation and cost.
Dictated to the Confidential Assistant transcribed by her corrected by me and pronounced in open Forum on this the 31st day of August, 2017.
Sd/-Smt. Elizabeth George (President):
Sd/-Sri.Antony Xavier (Member) :
Sd/-Smt. Jasmine.D. (Member) :
Appendix:-
Evidence of the complainants:-
PW1 - P.R. Vasudevan Pillai (Witness)
Ext.A1 - 1st Premium receipt
Ext.A2 - Policy Shedule Book
Ext.A3 - Receipt
Ext.A4 - Renewal Premium Receipt
Evidence of the opposite party:-Nil
// True Copy //
By Order
Senior Superintendent
Typed by:- br/-
Compared by:-
