Court No. - 29 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 28988 of 2009 Petitioner :- Ajay Kumar Gupta Respondent :- L.I.C. Of India & Others Petitioner Counsel :- M.D. Tiwari Respondent Counsel :- P. Padia Hon'ble Sunil Ambwani,J.
Hon’ble Kashi Nath Pandey,J.
Heard Sri M.D.Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
and Sri P.Padia, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents.
The petitioner has prayed for payment of commission on different
insurance policies in accordance with the contract, on business
promoted by him as an Agent of the Life Insurance Corporation of
India from the year 2003 till date. The petitioner was engaged in a
Government job in the year 2005, and has stopped working
thereafter as Agent of the Corporation. In paragraph 9 of the
counter affidavit it is stated that petitioner’s license for working as
an agent of the Corporation came to an end on 06.04.2004.
In paragraph 8 of the counter affidavit it is stated that out of 246
policies, the details of 32 policies given by the petitioner are
wrong and that 30 policies are still in existence. About 161
policies have become time barred and 14 policies have been
surrendered. In respect of 3 policies, complete payment has been
made.
The commission on premium paid by the insured, is payable for
serving the policy and not as an ex-gratia for having procured
business to the Corporation. It appears that the petitioner himself is
not aware of the existing and live policies and has prayed for
commission, only on the ground that he had promoted the business
for the Corporation at the relevant period.
The payment of commission to the Agent is a matter of contract
for which the petitioner has adequate remedies available in law,
and for which, a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India is not the ordinarily remedy.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed with liberty to the
petitioner to pursue remedies available to him in law to enforce the
contract.
Order Date :- 3.7.2010
A. Verma