Mumbai News: Consumer Commission Orders Insurance Company To Give Refund Of ₹8.5 Lakh To Senior Citizen

A district consumer commission has ordered Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Company Limited to refund Rs 8.5 lakh to a senior citizen who was misled by the firm's agent. The agent had promised better returns and the ability to withdraw money for the senior citizen's daughter's marriage after three years. However, the firm claimed the policies were for 99 years, and when the senior citizen wanted to withdraw and cancel the policies, the reconsideration period had expired. The commission deemed this unfair trade practice and ordered the refund with nine percent interest per annum from April 2009. Additionally, Rs 1 lakh was awarded for mental agony and litigation costs. Failure to pay within 30 days would incur interest on the awarded amount.

The order, issued on October 4, was in response to a complaint by Chembur resident Ganpat Niwatkar against Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Company Limited. Niwatkar, a senior citizen, had invested his savings of Rs 9 lakhs in the Post Office, receiving Rs 667 for every Rs one lakh every month. A Bajaj agent convinced him to invest with the company, promising monthly interest of Rs 7,000 and the ability to withdraw funds for his daughter's wedding after three years.

Niwatkar took three policies with Bajaj, but he received a receipt for only Rs 8.15 lakh, and the remaining amount was returned late. When he attempted to withdraw the funds, he was informed that the policy had a duration of 99 years. Niwatkar subsequently filed a consumer complaint, and when Bajaj did not appear in response to the notice, the commission passed an ex-parte order against the company.

The commission's hearing determined that Niwatkar had been misled regarding the policy, as senior citizens typically do not opt for 99-year policies. It found that the policy lacked clarity, and Niwatkar did not receive the expected returns or the ability to withdraw funds for his daughter's wedding, constituting unfair trade practices and service deficiencies. The commission concluded that the insurance company had created an impasse, leading to the order for the refund with interest and compensation for mental agony and litigation costs.