के (cid:3)ीय सूचना आयोग Central Information Commission बाबा गंगनाथ माग(cid:18), मुिनरका

Baba Gangnath Marg, Munirka नई िद(cid:24)ी, New Delhi – 110067 File No: CIC/LICOI/A/2023/139138 CIC/LICOI/A/2023/143877 Kamlesh Bhai Navnitlal Gandhi .….अपीलकता(cid:18)/Appellant VERSUS बनाम CPIO, LIC of India, CRM Department, Ahmedabad Divisional Office, Jeevan Prakash, Tilak Road, Ahmedabad – 380001 CPIO, Manager (CRM) LIC Of India, Divisional Office, Jeevan Prakash, Tilak Road, Ahmedabad- 380001 ….(cid:29)ितवादीगण /Respondent Date of Hearing : 11.12.2024 Date of Decision : 16.12.2024 INFORMATION COMMISSIONER : Vinod Kumar Tiwari The above-mentioned second appeals are clubbed together as the Appellant is common and subject-matter is similar in nature and hence are being disposed of through a common order.

CIC/LICOI/A/2023/139138 Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on : 30.11.2022 CPIO replied on : 23.12.2022 First appeal filed on : 31.12.2022 First Appellate Authority’s order : 01.02.2023 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 16.09.2023 Information sought:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 30.11.2022 (offline) seeking the following information:

“I have paid RS.47, 04,000/= as premium but the maturity is RS. 23, 42,890/= as against SA of 1,00,00,000/-

I would therefore like to know:

1. How many Jeevan Saral Legal suits are pending at LIC offices in various courts across the country?

2. How many Jeevan Saral Legal suits have been lost across the country?

Kindly provide me the details all the cases lost by LIC under Jeevan Saral plan in the following format.

A. Case no. / year B. Name of court & cases C. Action taken by LIC.

3. Under the policy no. 838632217 Sum assured is 1,00,00,000/=

I have paid premium of Rs. 47,04,000/= and received Rs.23,42,890/= as maturity against S.A of Rs. 1,00,00,000/=. Please let me know the reasons?

4. Please let me know in case LIC VS DEEPAK R. KOTHARI, LIC paid Rs.26,67,000/= against premium of Rs. 13, 65,000/= paid by customer.

In similar fashion i have paid premium of Rs. 47, 04,000/= and received 23, 42,890/- for SA of Rs.1, 00, 00,000/=. Almost half the premium similar to the above case.

Your reply must reach me at the earliest as per the rules of RTI act.

Please let me know the amount to be paid for providing me photo copies of the papers required by me.”

The CPIO furnished a point-wise reply to the Appellant on 23.12.2022 stating as under:

“Reply to queries no 1,2 and 4: Your queries no 1,2 and 4 are partially transferred to Other Public Authority i.e. LIC of India, Central Office, RTI Department, Mumbai. They will directly reply to you.

Reply no.3: The plan purchased by you is Jeevan Saral, 165-10, which contains two types of Sum Assured, one is Death S.A. and other is Maturity S.A. Under your policy Death S.A. is 1,00,00,000/- and Maturity S.A. is Rs.15,88,400/- which is printed on policy document.

Maturity payment details are as under:

Maturity Sum Assured: Rs. 15,88,400/- (Which is already mentioned on Original Policy Bond)

Loyalty Addition: Rs. 7,54,490/- (As mentioned in plan condition)

Total: Rs. 23,42,890/-

We are having a variety of Plans and every Plan has its own special features, this Plan i.e. Jeevan Saral is having significantly More Death benefits compare to Maturity. More over under this plan premium is same for all age groups, however Maturity amount differs with age, higher the age lesser the Maturity amount.”

Being dissatisfied, the appellant filed a First Appeal dated 31.12.2022. The FAA vide its order dated 01.02.2023, upheld the reply of the CPIO.

Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied, appellant approached the Commission with the instant Second Appeal. CIC/LICOI/A/2023/143877 Relevant facts emerging from appeal:

RTI application filed on : 30.11.2022 CPIO replied on : 23.12.2022 First appeal filed on : 31.12.2022 First Appellate Authority’s order : 01.02.2023 2nd Appeal/Complaint dated : 16.09.2023 Information sought:

The Appellant filed an RTI application dated 30.11.2022 (offline) s