##PAGE1##

FA/139/2023 D.O.D.:27.02.2026

LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA & ANR. VS. MRS. MANJU KALA

IN THE DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION

Date of Institution: 01.04.2023

Date of Hearing: 01.12.2025

Date of Decision: 27.02.2026

FIRST APPEAL NO.- 139/2023

IN THE MATTER OF

1. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,

THROUGH ITS CHIEF BRANCH MANAGER,

JHANSI BRANCH,

B.O.1 JHANSI 284003.

2. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA,

THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN, YOGAKSHEMA,

HEAD OFFICE, MUMBAI,

NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI 400002.

ALSO:

THROUGH MANAGER, L&HPF, LIC OF INDIA,

DIVISIONAL OFFICE, JEEVAN PRAKASH BUILDING,

25 KASTURBA GANDHI MARG, NEW DELHI-110001.

(Through: Mr. Anoop K. Kaushal, Advocate)

…Appellants

VERSUS

MRS. MANJU KALA,

W/O LATE MR. R.P. KALA,

R/O 120 (TF) CGHS DUPLEX,

VASUNDHARA ENCLAVE COLONY,

DALLUPURA WARD, DELHI – 110096.

(Through: Mr. Randhir Kumar, Advocate)

… Respondent

DISMISSED PAGE 1 OF 10

FA/139/2023 D.O.D.:27.02.2026

LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA & ANR. VS. MRS. MANJU KALA

CORAM:

HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL (PRESIDENT)

HON’BLE MS. BIMLA KUMARI, MEMBER (FEMALE)

Present: Mr. Anoop K. Kaushal, Counsel for the Appellants.

None for the Respondent.

PER: HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL,

PRESIDENT

JUDGMENT

1. The facts of the case, as per the District Commission record are as under:

“…she purchased an LIC policy from the OP called ’Jeevan

Saral’ on 28/08/2009 and she was initially paying Rs. 30,625/-

p.a. at quarterly intervals, which plan was subsequently changed

to Rs. 1,20,100/- and she paid this amount for 10 years and she

paid total amount of Rs. 12,05,800/- to the OP. The maturity

value/sum assured was 25,00,000/- and the policy was to mature

on 28/08/2019, however the OP paid only 4,51,208/- to the

Complainant towards maturity amount against the promised

maturity amount of 25 Lakh which is unfair trade practice under

section 2(47) Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and also deficiency

in service. Various letters were written to OP but it did not pay

maturity amount at all. Legal notice was served in which the

judgment of the Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs

Consumer Welfare Association & decided on 11/12/2018, by

Hon’ble National Commission was mentioned which was a case

with respect to the ’Jeevan Saral Policy’ itself and it was interalia

ordered in that case by the Hon’ble National Commission that

OP has to pay the maturity amount to the complainant. Although

OP had replied that legal notice yet, OP did not pay

complete/matured amount of the claim which amounts to

deficiency in service and as such she has filed the present

complaint interalia praying that OP be directed to pay complete

insured amount/maturity amount with interest @12% P.A.,

Compensation or Rs. 50,000/- and legal expenses Rs. 50,000/-.

DISMISSED PAGE 2 OF 10

FA/139/2023 D.O.D.:27.02.2026

LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA & ANR. VS. MRS. MANJU KALA

OP filed its written statement alleging various relevant facts

with respect to its status, functioning number of policy it had

issued and the features of the policy as preliminary objection but

ultimately stated that the maturity benefit under the policy is

provided in the policy documents itself which explains that life

insured, who would survive on the date of maturity, is paid sums

equal to maturity sum assured and in this matter, the amount Rs.

25 Lakh was death sum assured and not the maturity sum

assured. It is further stated that written policy documents was

given to policy holder immediately after the issuance of policy

and the column against maturity sum assured, was blank/not

printed inadvertently and it was for the policy holder to bring the

same to the notice of policy issuing office to get the same

corrected and since the column of amount sum assured at the

time of maturity is blank, there is no deficiency in the service of

the OP. It is further stated that ’Jeevan Saral Policy was

introduced for the sale only after complying all the requirements

of insurance regulators i.e. IRDAI and the premium applied for

providing in