Case
CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM CIVIL STATION ,KALPETTA WAYANAD-673122 PHONE 04936-202755 Complaint Case No. CC/132/2017 1. A.Balakrishnan, S/o Narayani Nethiar, Aged 59 years, Padari House, Kattayad Post, Vellamunda, Mananthavady Vellamunda Wayanad Kerala ...........Complainant(s) Versus 1. The Branch Manager, Life Insurance Corporation Of India, Kalpetta branch. P.B No.31, Madiyoorkuni, Kalpetta Kalpetta Wayanad Kerala ............Opp.Party(s) BEFORE: HON'BLE MR. Jose V. Thannikode PRESIDENT HON'BLE MR. Chandran Alachery MEMBER For the Complainant: For the Opp. Party: Dated : 08 Jan 2018 Final Order / Judgement By. Sri. Jose. V. Thannikode, President: The complaint is filed under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act against the opposite party to get the insured amount mentioned in the policy bond and to pay cost and compensation due to non allowing of the sum assured. 2. Brief of the complaint:- The applicant taken policy bearing number 795315430 of opposite party's JEEVAN SARAL (profits) plan. The opposite party issued a policy bond to the applicant. As per the bond Maturity sum assured is shown as Rs.62,500/-. The date of commencement of policy is 28.03.2007 and the date of maturity is on 28.03.2017. As per the bond it was assured by the opposite party 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 shall be payable. While so the applicant received a letter from the opposite party dated 10.05.2016 stating that they have noticed that in the policy document issued to the applicant, there has been an inadvertent typographical error in the maturity sum assured, which has been shown as Rs. NIL. And also stated that the maturity sum assured is Rs.21,815/-. The complainant sent a replay to above letter stating maturity sum assured not shown as Rs. NIL in the bond issued to him. This complainant was under the impression that the opposite party mistakenly sent a letter to him. After that another letter from opposite party dated 06.01.2017 was received by this complainant. In the said letter it is informed that the policy is getting matured on 28.03.2017 and the complainant is entitled to get sum of Rs.28,360/- as maturity benefit and also requested to submit policy document and other particulars to get the amount. The complainant got surprised by the letter. The premium of above numbered policy is Rs.255/- per month and the duration of the policy is ten years. The complainant paid a sum of Rs.30,600/-. The complainant paid entire premium as required under the policy without any default. The amount offered to the complainant is much lesser than the premium which is paid by the complainant. At the time of joining in the policy the opposite party made believe the complainant that the maturity sum assured is Rs.62,500/- and after maturity the complainant will get the said amount. In the bond issued to this complainant it is clearly mentioned that the maturity sum assured is Rs.62,500/-. The opposite party informed that the maturity sum assured is Rs.21,815/- only a few months before of its maturity. The complainant caused to issue a lawyer notice dated 31.01.2017 demanding the payment of Rs.62,500/- which is the maturity sum assured shown in the policy bond issued to the complainant. After that the opposite party sent a reply denying the claim of the complainant with lame excuses. It is stated in the reply notice that the maturity sum assured left blank, in the bond issued to the complainant is a typographical error. It is also stated in the reply that the opposite party not assured to refund the premium paid to the life assured. Even it is believed the version of opposite party that some typographical error is occurred in the policy bond issued, they have not taken any steps to cure any such defects even after the scrutinised the bond. 3. As per the policy bond it is clearly shown that the maturity amount is Rs.62,500/-, it is not a typographical error as stated in the letter dated 10.05.2017. If the real maturity sum assured is Rs.21,815/- the opposite party ought to have informed the complainant at the commencement of the policy it should be there in the bond issued. If the column of maturity sum assured is left blank as stated in the reply notice it is intentional and deliberate and only to hide the real maturity amount from the customer. The opposite party well aware that no one will join in this policy if they know the maturity sum assured is less than the total premium paid, at the beginning. The opposite party made believe the complainant that a sum of Rs.62,500/- will be given to the complainant on maturity of the policy. Actually the opposite party cheated this complainant to get illegal monetary benefit. The opposite party suppressed the the material facts about the policy and thereby made unfair trade practice. The opposite party willfully denying the right of the life assured. There is deficiency in service in the act of opposite party. Hence filed this complaint. 4. Notice served to opposite party and opposite party filed version stating that the complaint is filed by the complainant is not maintainable either in law, facts and circumstances to this case and is liable to be dismissed. The complainant has absolutely no cause of action to sue against this opposite party being an unnecessary party at this stage the complainant is liable to pay compensatory cost to this opposite party having unnecessarily dragged in to the Court. In the policy document having No.795315430 is issued to-the complainant by this opposite party and during the term of the policy it was observed that maturity sum assured of Rs.62,500/- each were printed in the policy bond. The statement of the claimant that maturity sum assured was printed as Rs.62,500/- on the policy document is wrong, whereas the space for the maturity sum assured was clearly left blank. This opposite party had sent a letter to the policy holder on 10.05.2016 informing that the maturity Sum assured under the policy was 21815 and it was omitted to be printed on the policy bond due to a typographical error, the impression of the complainant that the letter send on 10.05.2016informing that the maturity sum assured is Rs.21815/- Was by mistake, is not Correct. The opposite party sent this letter to inform the maturity sum assured amount, since it was not printed on the policy bend. The letter issued by this opposite party to the complainant dated 06.01.2017 was the intimation letter sent to the party intimating the maturity claim is due on 28.03.2017 and calling for requirements for the same. The amount intimated in that letter is Rs.28360/- is the total of maturity sum assured of Rs.21815 and plus loyalty addition of Rs.6545 . These two amounts were separately shown in the letter. This is a policy issued under Jeevan saral Plan of Lie of India. Under Jeevan Saral Policy, amount of monthly premium is first chosen by proposer and death sum assured is fixed as 250 times of such monthly premium amount excluding extra premiums. Maturity sum assured is arrived as per the chart prepared by our actuarial department when the plan was introduced and the maturity Sum Assured is varied on the basis of the age and term of the policy for the same amount of premium. The policy was issued on 28.03.2007 for maturity sum assured Rs.21,815/- death sum assured and accident benefits were Rs.62,500/- each, The Term rider benefit was left blank since the same was not opted for by the proposer. But the maturity sum assured was inadvertently omitted to be printed on the policy bond due to a typographical error . When this fact came to our notice, the letter dated 10.05.2016 was sent by registered post to the complainant stating that the maturity sum assured under this policy was Rs.21,815/-. There is no breach of obligation from the part of opposite party. This opposite party had sent intimation on 06.01.2017 for disbursing maturity sum assured well in advance of maturity date. Rs.62,500/- mentioned in the complaint is not promised as maturity sum assured by this opposite party. In the policy document maturity benefit is shown as in the event of 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. At the end of the policy Bond the policy holder is specifically urged to check the document for any mistakes and return the same for correction if any mistakes be found therein. This shows that the document issued is liable to be corrected and the opposite party as well as the complainant is responsible for the correction of any errors. This opposite party replied to the legal notice in time and clarified the points mentioned earlier. This opposite party had sent intimation for setting Maturity sum assured to the claimant on 06.01.2017 itself and claimant has not yet responded. Whatever benefits actually eligible as per the terms and conditions of the policy which is uniformly available all over the country will be payable and that amount is communicated to the policy holder by this opposite party. This opposite party have been requesting the claimant to submit the duly completed discharge from and policy document for settlement of the maturity value due on 28.03.2017. The complainant has intentionally not yet complied with the requirements including bank account details, hence this opposite party not able to settle the amount and there is no deficiency in service on part of this opposite party, There is no deficiency of service on the part of this opposite party as alleged in the complaint by the complainant and hence it is denied that the complainant is entitled for getting the amount and compensation as prayed in the complaint and the complainant is to put strict proof thereof. There is no deficiency of service from 'the part of opposite party and the complaint is totally denied by this opposite party, especially prayer clause of the complaint. 5. Complainant filed proof affidavit and stated as stated in the complaint and he is examined as PW1 and Ext.A1 to A11 documents were marked. Opposite party also filed proof affidavit and he is examined as OPW1 and Ext.B1 and B2 documents were marked. Ext.B1 is the Copy of Agents Manual (Jeevan Saral Policy). Ext.B2 is the copy of Proposal form of LIC Jeevan Saral Policy. 6. On perusal of complaint, version, documents and evidences we have raised the following points for consideration:- 1. Whether there is any deficiency of service from the part of opposite party? 2. Relief and Cost. 7. Point No.1:- Ext.A1 the Policy Schedule Bond shows in maturity sum assured rupees column blank, Death benefit sum assured under main plan Rs.62,500/-, Accident benefits sum assured Rs.62,500/-, Term rider sum assured Rupees blank, since it is written in one column the complainant believed that maturity sum assured is Rs.62,500/-. When this confusion is noted by the opposite party on 10.05.2016 the opposite party send a notice stating that ''we have noticed that in the policy document issued to you there has been an inadvertent typographical error in the maturity sum assured, which has been shown Rupees NIL and further stated that the correct maturity sum assured is Rs.21,815/- and requested to send the original policy for correct the maturity sum''. Ext.A3 is the Reply to Ext.A2 and stated that in Ext.A1 nowhere it is written as ''NIL''. Ext.A5 is the letter given to the complainant by the opposite party stating that the maturity sum is on 28.03.2017 is Rs28,360/- and requested acknowledge the same after comply the formalities. Ext.A7 is the Lawyer Notice issued by the complainant demanding to pay Rs.62,500/- instead of Rs.28,360/-, which is written in the policy bond. Ext.A9 is the Reply given by the opposite party to the Ext.A7 Lawyer Notice stating that they are ready to pay Rs.28,360/- which already intimated. As per Ext.B1 Manuel shows that maturity sum assured is calculated on the basis of chart depends on age and term which given the maturity sum assured per 100 rupees of premium remittance eg:- If he is remitting Rs.250/- premium per month the maturity sum assured is 2.5 times the figure given in the chart against the age of term. 8. Anyway in two letter dated 10.05.2016 and 28.03.2017 the opposite party has intimated that in the policy bond, it was omitted to print the sum assured on the policy bond due to a typographical error and further informed that on 28.03.2017 the total maturity sum assured is Rs.28,360/- including loyalty addition. In such a situation we have perused the rulings of Hon'ble NCDRC in RP No.2802 of 2011 it is observed the insurer cannot get benefit of typographical mistake. In a similar case in the Civil Appeal No.6347 of 200 HP State Forest Company Ltd V/s M/s. United India Insurance Company Limited in which the Hon'ble Apex Court held that on the basis of typographical mistake which has been rectified in the records of the company before the occurrence, insured cannot get benefit of typographical mistake and it is observed in RP No.3833 of 2011 by the NCDRC also. Hence we could not find any deficiency of service from the side of opposite party. Hence the Point No.1 is found accordingly. 9. Point No.2:- Since the Point No.1 is found in favour of opposite party, there is no Order as to Cost and Compensation. Hence the Point No.2 is decided accordingly. In the result, the complaint is dismissed and any way the complainant is entitled for the maturity sum assured and offered by the opposite party in Ext.A5 ie Rs.28,360/- (Rupees Twenty Eight Thousand and Three Sixty) with interest if any. Dictated to the Confidential Assistant, transcribed by him and corrected by me and Pronounced in the Open Forum on this the 8th day of January 2018. Date of Filing: 19.06.2017. PRESIDENT :Sd/- MEMBER :Sd/- /True Copy/ Sd/- PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD. APPENDIX. Witness for the complainant:- PW1. Balakrishnan. Retired person. Witness for the Opposite Party:- OPW1. Augustine Thomas. Manager, Legal, LIC Divisonal Office, Kozhikode. Exhibits for the complainant: A1. LIC's Jeevan Saral Policy Schedule. A2. Letter. Dt:10.05.2016. A3. Copy of Reply Letter. Dt:01.06.2016. A4. Postal Receipt. A5. Letter. Dt:06.01.2017. A6. Postal Receipt. A7. Copy of Lawyer Notice. Dt:31.01.2017. A8. Acknowledgment Card. A9. Reply Notice. Dt:23.02.2017. A10. First Premium Receipt. A11. Renewal Premium Receipt. Exhibits for the opposite party:- B1. Copy of Agents Manuel. B2. Copy of Proposal Form of LIC Jeevan Saral Policy. Sd/- PRESIDENT, CDRF, WAYANAD. a/- [HON'BLE MR. Jose V. Thannikode] PRESIDENT [HON'BLE MR. Chandran Alachery] MEMBER