This C.C. is coming on before us for hearing in the presence of Sri. Alavala Yugandhar Rao, Advocate for complainant; and of Sri. A.V. Ramanuja Charyulu, Advocate for opposite party; upon perusing the material papers on record; upon hearing and having stood over for consideration, this Forum passed the following:-

O R D E R

(Per Sri R.Kiran Kumar, Member)

          This Complaint is filed u/s.12-A of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. 

2.       The averments made in the complaint are that the complainant is a retired employee and policy holder of opposite party company, he joined in money bank policy on 10-03-1993 vide policy No.681269590, the term of policy is 20 years on which the maturity date is 10-03-2013.  The complainant submitted that at the time of taking policy the date of birth of the complainant was corrected in the policy 09-12-1952 to 09-12-1950 and for the adjusted age factor the premium amount also corrected as Rs.327/- to Rs.306.6 (i.e. quarterly Rs.919/-) and collected accordingly.  The complainant submitted that at the time of taking policy he is working in Singareni Collaries Company Ltd., Yellandu and policy amount is recovered from the salary of the complainant for a period of 18 years and after retirement of the service complainant has to pay the policy premium quarterly Rs.919/- until its maturity period dt. 20-02-2013. The complainant submitted that after maturity, he submitted withdrawal voucher along with policy bond to the opposite party, but the documents submitted by the complainant were returned to the complainant stating that he has to pay the premium amounts without verifying the record.  The complainant further submitted that he sent legal notice on 02-07-2013 to the opposite party and copy to the Divisional Manager, LIC of India, Warangal even though the claim was not settled and the opposite party have not given any reply.  The complainant also submitted that as per the terms and conditions he paid all the premiums up to date of last payment i.e. 10-02-2013.  The complainant further submitted that the opposite party corporation corrected the date of birth from 09-02-1952 to 09-02-1950 on original policy bond by putting signature at correction of date of birth, also rectified the premium from Rs.327/- to 306.6.  The complainant applied for status report, wherein the maturity date was shown as 03/2014 instead of 03/2013 as shown in original policy, by showing the same the opposite party company trying to avoid the claim amount, saying that complainant has to pay 1 year premium.  The complainant submitted that even after receiving legal notice as the opposite party corporation failed to pay the surrender / claim amount to the complainant which amounts to deficiency of service for that the complainant approached the Forum. 

3.       On behalf of the complainant, the following documents were filed and marked as Exs.A.1 to A.7. 

4.       On receipt of notice, opposite parties appeared through their counsel and filed written version.  In their written version, opposite party submitted that the life assured issued a policy bearing No.681269590 under T&T 75-20 for a sum assured of Rs.50,000/- by submitting a proposal dt.29-10-1993, the date of commencing of policy is 10-03-1993, the policy holder has not submitted any proposal and also not paid any premium from 03/1993, by oversight the policy was issued with date of commencement as 10-03-1993.  The opposite parties also submitted that the policy was wrongly issued with date of commencement as 10-03-1993 the office of opposite party corrected the date of commencement as 10-03-1994 and corrected the installment amount which worked out to Rs.313/-.  The opposite party also submitted that the life assured / policy holder submitted the proposal on 29-10-1993, submitted medical report dt. 28-01-1994, then the policy cannot be issued on 10-03-1993 when the proposal dt. 29-10-1993, the policy cannot be issued with date of commencement as 10-03-1993.  The opposite parties also submitted that due to clerical error, by oversight the policy was wrongly issued with date of commencement as 10-03-1993, the life assured not submitted any proposal or medical report on 10-03-1993.  The opposite parties also submitted that the premium was also recovered from 03/1994 onwards, from the salary of the policy holder; the office of Opposite Party Corporation rectified the clerical error and corrected the date of commencement of policy as 10-03-1994.  The opposite party corporation also submitted that as per the schedule of the policy in question, at the end of 5,10,15 survival benefit @ 20% of the sum assured was due to be payable under the policy in question, as per the revised date of commencement i.e. 10-03-1994 survival benefit of Rs.10,000/- each, due on 10-03-1999, 10-03-2004 and 10-03-2009 was paid to the policy holder, the policy holder also accepted the survival benefits as per the revised date of commencement of policy i.e. 10-03-1994 without any protest and the life assured with an ulterior motive to gain wrongfully filed the present complaint, the premium of the complaint is not tenable and there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party corporation.  The opposite party corporation also submitted that the net maturity claim under the said policy worked to Rs.69,079/- only  and the opposite party is not liable to pay any claim of the policy holder under the said policy and not liable to pay compensation as such prayed to dismiss the complaint.

5.       On behalf of the opposite party the following documents were filed and marked as Exhibits B.1. to B.7.

6.       Heard Oral arguments from both sides. 

7.       Upon perusing the material papers on record and upon hearing the arguments, now the point that arose for consideration is, or

i) Whether the there is deficiency of service on the part of opposite party corporation over the complainant while issuing the policy?

ii) To What Relief?

Point:-

8.       In this case complainant had taken money back policy for a period of 20 years vide policy No.681269590 from the opposite party.  According to the complainant at the time of issuing the policy the date of birth of the complainant was corrected in the policy bond, at that time he is working as employee in Singareni S.C. Co. Ltd., the policy amount was recovered from the salary of the complainant for a period of 18 years and later the complainant has to pay the premium amount until its maturity.  According to the complainant he submitted withdrawal vouchers along with policy bond to the opposite party after completion of maturity date, but the opposite party corporation returned the documents stating that the complainant has to pay premium amount.  On 2-07-2013 the complainant got issued legal notice to the opposite party, even though the opposite party failed to pay the maturity amount, as such the complainant approached the Forum for redressal.     

9.       From the documents and material available on record, we observed that as per Exhibit B1  Proposal Form age of the complainant was corrected and also we observed that in another column “If policy is to be taken back, indicate date”, in this column month also corrected and also we observed on Exhibit B2, date of birth was shown as 09-12-1952 and corrected as 09-12-1950 and also age 41 years was corrected as 43 years by the opposite party corporation and the same was admitted in their written version by the opposite party.  Except the above alterations, there are no other alterations in the policy bond and also we observed that as per the proposal Exhibit B1, there is a specific column that the proposal of the policy by dated back as 10-07-1973.   The opposite parties in their written version they admitted that due to clerical error, by oversight the policy was wrongly issued with date commencement as 10-03-1993 but they failed to explain what prevented them to alter the date of commencement of policy.  From the above observations we are of the opinion that the date of maturity of the policy is 10-03-2013 and as per the complaint, the complainant already paid the entire premium to the opposite party corporation.  Except admitting the clerical mistake and filing the Exhibit B1 document before this Forum the opposite party corporation failed to produce any document to disprove the case of the complainant.  And also we observed that the opposite party LIC Corporation dragged the poor complainant to unwanted litigation, by admitting the clerical mistake of their staff and the opposite party corporation refused to pay the maturity amount which is absolutely improper and unfair.  It was an ethical obligation of LIC to extend helping hand to retired employee as such this point is answered accordingly in favour of the complainant.

10.     In the result, the complaint is allowed in part directing the opposite party to pay the policy amount with interest from the date of maturity (i.e. from 10-03-2013) as per their guidelines, within one month from the date of receipt this order.      

          Typed to dictation, corrected and pronounced by us in the open forum, on this the 13^th day of May, 2015.

       Member                  FAC President             

District Consumer Forum, Khammam

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

WITNESSES EXAMINED

For Complainant                                                       For Opposite party   

       -None-                                                                           -None-

DOCUMENTS MARKED

For Complainant                                                       For Opposite party

                Member                  FAC President             

District Consumer Forum, Khammam