BHAVANA KHEMANI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are husband and wife. They both have purchased two separate insurance policies, namely, "TATA AIA Life Insurance Fortune Guarantee Plus" (UIN: 110N158V09) being Policy Nos. C265766705 and C240336712 respectively, (herein after referred to as "Policies") from TATA AIA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, being the respondent no.3 herein, on 30/3/2023 for an assured sum of Rs.20,40,00,000.00 each policy through the intermediary/ broker/ agent, namely, Bajaj Capital Insurance Broking Limited being the respondent no.4.

(2.) Mr. Ranjan Bachwat, Learned Senior Advocate representing the petitioners submits that there are two methods of getting the policy i.e. (i) digital mode and (ii) non-digital mode. At the time of purchasing the policy, neither the insurer nor the agent informed the petitioners that there are two methods of purchasing the policy and sold Non-Digital Policies to the petitioners. After purchasing the policies, the petitioners came to know from their relatives and friends that there is an option of getting Digital Policy also with the same premium but the return of the digital policy is 5% higher than the Non-Digital Policy.

(3.) Mr. Bachwat submits that when the petitioners came to know about the said fact, immediately the petitioners approached the respondent nos. 3 and 4 requesting for conversion of their Non-Digital Policy to Digital Policy. Inspite of several requests of the petitioners, the respondent nos. 3 and 4 failed to consider the grievances of the petitioners, subsequently, the petitioners approached IRDAI. The IRDAI directed the respondent insurer to resolve the issue and immediately inform the same to the petitioners and update the status in Bima Bharosa, but the respondent insurer rejected the request of the petitioners.