Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.21 seconds)

Ramilaben D Patel vs Icici Prodential Life Ins Co Ltd. on 1 February, 2021

It would be so, it being only after policy being in paid up status, that all of this endevour has been to take benefit of legal position on account of free look period. But for the forgoing reasons the complainant is not found to be having any case, the findings beings otherwise. None of the citations submitted therefore could be given effect for the benefit of the complainant or for finding deficiency with the opponent. They are: Sri Anup Kumar Biswas Vs. ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Co. Ltd., (Kolkata) decided on 17/02/2009; Kamaljeet Singh Vs. LIC of India, (Chandigarh) decided on 01/02/2013; Kamaljeet Kaur Vs. HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co. Ltd., Reported in II (2013) CPJ 36B (CN) (UT); SBI Life Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Amrit Kaur, reported in III (2014) CPJ 96 (Punj.
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Dineshbhai B Patel vs Icici Prodential Life Ins Co Ltd. on 1 February, 2021

It would be so, it being only after the request for switch was replied that it could not be processed for the policy being in paid up status, that all of this endevour has been to take benefit of legal position on account of free look period. But for the forgoing reasons the complainant is not found to be having any case, the findings beings otherwise. None of the citations submitted therefore could be given effect for the benefit of the complainant or for finding deficiency with the opponent. They are: Sri Anup Kumar Biswas Vs. ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Co. Ltd., (Kolkata) decided on 17/02/2009; Kamaljeet Singh Vs. LIC of India, (Chandigarh) decided on 01/02/2013; 11 Kamaljeet Kaur Vs. HDFC Standard Life Insurance Co. Ltd., Reported in II (2013) CPJ 36B (CN) (UT); SBI Life Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Amrit Kaur, reported in III (2014) CPJ 96 (Punj.
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1