VIRENDRA PAL KAPOOR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard Shri Dhruv Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. The office of Assistant Solicitor General of India, Lucknow Bench of Allahabad High Court has accepted notice on behalf of Union of India. Mohd. Altaf Mansoor appears for Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority-respondent No. 2, Shri Sudeep Seth has accepted notice on behalf of State Bank of India-respondent no.3. Shri Sachin Garg appears for SBI Life Insurance Company Limited-respondent no.4.

(2.) Dr. Virendra Pal Kapoor-the petitioner is a senior citizen aged 72 years. He retired as a Scientist of National Botanic Research Institute and is settled at Lucknow. He invested Rs.50,000/- in the year 2007 in SBI Life - "UNIT PLUS II - Single", a Unit Linked Product offered by SBI Life Insurance Company Limited with an option of a limited term of five years (from 9.1.2007 to 9.1.2012), on the basic sum assured for life with risk cover at 625% of Rs.3,12,500/-, with a choice of investment in growth fund (100%). The petitioner survived the term of the policy of five years. On its maturity he was paid only Rs.248/- as a balance in the fund, on which the policy was terminated.

(3.) By this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for directions to declare Circular No.032/IRDA/Act/Dec-2005 dated 21.12.2005 as ultra vires the Insurance Act, 1938 so far as it relates to the deduction of charges from the policy holders fund; to issue a writ of mandamus commanding the State Bank of India-respondent no.3 not to allow use of Logo, Branch Name i.e. SBI, their Banking Branches, their employees etc. for the purpose of selling or soliciting the insurance business of the respondent no.4-SBI Life Insurance Company Limited. He has also prayed for a direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (IRDA) to ensure that the commission is not paid to the insurance agents and intermediaries etc. from the investment component under ULIP policies and further a direction to State Bank of India not to give publicity to the fact that it does not underwrite the risk or act as an insurer as provided under Clause (g) of Regulation 9 of Licensing to Corporate Agents Regulations, 2002. The petitioner has also prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding the IRDA to redress the grievance of the petitioner as contained in petitioner's representation dated 8.2.2012.