The main legal point established in the judgment is that the provisions of the Life Insurance Corporation of India (Agents) Regulations, 1972, particularly regulation 19(1)(b), prevail over the provisions of section 44(c) of the Insurance Act, 1938, in cases of forfeiture of renewal commission for insurance agents.

1. In this writ petition, the petitioner is aggrieved by the orders dated 20.2.2003 and 25.2.2003, contained in Annexure 4 series, whereby and whereunder his renewal commission has been forfeited.

2. In short, the relevant facts are that the petitioner was initially appointed as an agent on probation with effect from 7.11.1988 by the Branch Manager, Muzaffarpur Branch Office-1 vide letter, contained in Annexure 1, for the period 7.11.1988 to 6.11.1992. He was given Agency Code No. 04042531. Later, vide letter dated 5.12.1989 his appointment as an Insurance Agent was confirmed as per regulation 7(2) of the Life Insurance Corporation of India (Agents) Regulations, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations). It is claimed that the petitioner continuously worked as an agent for more than 13 years and finally on 15.12.2001 he submitted his resignation to the competent authority, on receipt of which the petitioner, vide letter dated 28.1.2002 (Annexure 3), was communicated that his said resignation is under consideration before the competent authority and that, in the meanwhile, the competent authority has directed to stop his commission bill till further instructions.

3. The petitioner thereafter joined as Sale Team Manager in Allianz Bajaj Life Insurance Company Ltd., Patna Branch, where he is presently working. Finally the petitioner, vide impugned orders, passed by the Marketing Manager and communicated by the Branch Manager of the L.I.C., was intimated about the forfeiture of his renewal commission under sub-section (c) of section 44 of the Insurance Act, 1938 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

4. It is stated by the petitioner that the respondent I.C. has been giving such benefits to many such other agents, whose agency has been terminated but still they are getting renewal commission on such premiums received by the L.I.C. of India and the prime example of such agents are those who have been promoted or absorbed as Development Officer in the L.I.C. of India and still getting their renewal commission though they have ceased to be an agent. This fact has been answered by the respondent-L.I.C. in paragraph 18 of their counter affidavit simply stating that the said submissions are misconceived and are fit to be rejected and that the petitioner has failed to cite any identical case in which renewal commission has been paid.

5. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent-L.I.C, it is stated that the petitioner resigned as an agent to join another Life Insurance Company, namely, Allianz Bajaj Life Insurance Company even without accepting of his resignation by the competent authority. However, it is admitted that in view of the provisions, as contained in regulation 17(2) of the Regulations, his agency will be deemed to have been terminated after the expiry of one month from the date of submission of his resignation. It is further stated that the petitioner purposely resigned as an agent of the Corporation to join Allianz Bajaj Life Insurance Company. As such, in accordance with the provisions of section 44 of the Act, he is not entitled to claim renewal commission. According to the respondents, the petitioner had obtained an advance of Rs. 1,06,708.40. It is alleged that he took an advance of Rs. 65,000/- just ten days before when he was already contemplating to leave the Corporation and, further, got the amount of loan adjusted at the Branch level upto December, 2002 ignoring the direction given in the letter dated 31.12.2001 of the Senior Divisional Manager to stop payment of commission leaving a sum of Rs. 10,204.88 unadjusted although in accordance with law the petitioner was/is not entitled to receive commission. It is alleged that from the letter of resignation, contained in Annexure A, it is clear that he submitted his resignation after he already obtained a. letter of appointment in the service of Allianz Bajaj Life Insurance Company. The respondents have thus stated that the competent author