Soon after that NG stood up and drawn the attention of bench
towards arriving of LIFE FUND through various data of income , outgo and
balance added to LIC’s Life fund and then sec26 is applied. There was long
discussion on it as Mr. Khanna has his own perceptions also about LIFE FUND and
Insurance accounting. Since after many statements by LIC, ED (actl.) and NG
guided by MSM the matter looked like more deep and confusing about Life Fund
calculation and valuation surplus.
Manytime both side referred various pages of Annual accts book and tried to bring their point to Bench.
At one stage MSM came forward and stated that as Retd LICian and fellow Of Ins. Inst of India tied to explain the process and he addressed the bench and told the process to which justice remarked well it was good knowledge for him also and he too learnt in the process, but what Mr. Murty was saying was going in favour of LIC only. The same was being said by ED. MSM said “let me complete, sir” and he further explained how the derived valuation was actual and 5% to Govt. and 95% to policy holder allocated. He described it was not given immediately but allocated and paid with SA.
It looked like as if entered in dark area of Actuarial valuation and jugglery of so much data.( I may be wrong also)
However jus Khanna after so much things went many time in deep thinking also and finally put a question to ED(actl.,)
If an amount of say 3500 cr. is added as expenses in the 2015-16 Annual Accts., will valuation surplus go down by that amount.
Both side said no it was not like that. Bench himself said if Life Fund would be affected by 1000cr. To this ED said no sir it will have wide impact and estimated liability will go more high. She said expenses are estimated per policy and it will have far reaching impact on LF and valuation surplus will go down drastically.
Earlier MSM also placed that only 0.6% impact will be on LF if pensioners updation is done. Just. said no you can’t talk of LF for this. It can’t be torched. Lastly he said to NG that what ED saying is per policy exp. and far reaching affect on surplus.
At this NG rightly said I have said earlier in my submissions not yesterday but before that about Art 14, discrimination and our eligibility thereby so that is prime.
On financial issue bench also commented some time in competitive market all is to be seen.
Finally he reminded LIC Sr. also that they should have corporate responsibility and why this 3000/- min pension. You must care pensioners.
So all is done. Pensioners have put their case strongly before bench and our Sr. advocate NG with his ability and effective communication placed our case to the best of his capacity.
Let us be hopeful and pray.
Pramod Bhatnagar
Jt Secy
New Delhi
Manytime both side referred various pages of Annual accts book and tried to bring their point to Bench.
At one stage MSM came forward and stated that as Retd LICian and fellow Of Ins. Inst of India tied to explain the process and he addressed the bench and told the process to which justice remarked well it was good knowledge for him also and he too learnt in the process, but what Mr. Murty was saying was going in favour of LIC only. The same was being said by ED. MSM said “let me complete, sir” and he further explained how the derived valuation was actual and 5% to Govt. and 95% to policy holder allocated. He described it was not given immediately but allocated and paid with SA.
It looked like as if entered in dark area of Actuarial valuation and jugglery of so much data.( I may be wrong also)
However jus Khanna after so much things went many time in deep thinking also and finally put a question to ED(actl.,)
If an amount of say 3500 cr. is added as expenses in the 2015-16 Annual Accts., will valuation surplus go down by that amount.
Both side said no it was not like that. Bench himself said if Life Fund would be affected by 1000cr. To this ED said no sir it will have wide impact and estimated liability will go more high. She said expenses are estimated per policy and it will have far reaching impact on LF and valuation surplus will go down drastically.
Earlier MSM also placed that only 0.6% impact will be on LF if pensioners updation is done. Just. said no you can’t talk of LF for this. It can’t be torched. Lastly he said to NG that what ED saying is per policy exp. and far reaching affect on surplus.
At this NG rightly said I have said earlier in my submissions not yesterday but before that about Art 14, discrimination and our eligibility thereby so that is prime.
On financial issue bench also commented some time in competitive market all is to be seen.
Finally he reminded LIC Sr. also that they should have corporate responsibility and why this 3000/- min pension. You must care pensioners.
So all is done. Pensioners have put their case strongly before bench and our Sr. advocate NG with his ability and effective communication placed our case to the best of his capacity.
Let us be hopeful and pray.
Pramod Bhatnagar
Jt Secy
New Delhi
No comments:
Post a Comment