Skip to main content

Consumer Forum Directed Birla Sun Life To Refund Premium Over False Assurance

Birla Sun Life Insurance Company has been directed by UT District consumer disputes redressal forum to refund to a complainant the surrendered value along with the cost of litigation, on the ground of false assurance to provide an insurance cover that he required.
The complainant, Yashu Vashishath, a resident of sector 19 and a student at Punjab University subscribed to the policy which assured catering to all the requirements needed for him to get admission in Winconsin, U. S. A.
After paying the first premium of Rs 1 lakh, he left for the US. Yashu alleged that the premium receipt that the company issued to the school authorities abroad was rejected as the policy was not recognized there.
Yashu then took up the issue with insurance company, asking for the refund of the premium, but to no avail. A complaint was filed with the insurance ombudsman and despite the instructions; the company did not send the duplicate copy of the policy bond and or refund the amount.
Meanwhile, the insurance company pleaded that the complaint was barred by limitation as the same was filed after five years of inception of the policy. It was stated that the policyholder signed the declaration after agreeing to the contents. The company also alleged that complainant had failed to pay the remaining installments.
The council for the appellants submitted that the consumer complaint was filed after a lapse of five years of purchase of the policy and as such, it was palpably barred by time. Insurance ombudsman also held that the complainant was only entitled to the surrender value as five years had already lapsed.

Article referred: http://www.policymantra.com/blog/

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Michigan House Approves 'Right-to-Work' Bill

Amid raucous protests, the Republican-led Michigan House approved a contentious right-to-work bill on  Dec 11 limiting unions' strength in the state where the (Union for American Auto Workers)  UAW was born. The chamber passed a measure dealing with public-sector workers 58-51 as protesters shouted "shame on you" from the gallery and huge crowds of union backers massed in the state Capitol halls and on the grounds. Backers said a right-to-work law would bring more jobs to Michigan and give workers freedom. Critics said it would drive down wages and benefits. The right-to-work movement has been growing in the country since Wisconsin fought a similar battle with unions over two years ago. Michigan would become the 24th state to enact right-to-work provisions, and passage of the legislation would deal a stunning blow to the power of organized labor in the United States. Wisconsin Republicans in 2011 passed laws severely restricting the power of public s...
Post a Comment
Read more

Power to re-assess by AO and disclosure of material facts

In AVTEC Limited v. DCIT, the division of the Delhi High Court held that AO is bound to look at the litigation history of the assessee and cannot expect the assessee to inform him.  In the instant case, the Petitioner, engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling of automobiles, power trains and power shift transmissions along with their components, approached the High Court challenging the re-assessment order passed against them. For the year 2006-07, the Petitioner entered into a Business Transfer Agreement with Hindustan Motors Ltd, as per which, the Petitioner took over the business from HML.  While filing income tax return for the said year, the petitioner claimed the expenses incurred in respect of professional and legal charges for the purpose of taking over of the business from HML as capital expenses and claimed depreciation. Article referred: http://www.taxscan.in/assessing-officer-bound-look-litigation-history-assessee-delhi-hc-read-order/8087/
Post a Comment
Read more

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more