INDUSTRIAL iINTERNSHIP iREPORT

On

“A iStudy ion iFinancial iStatement, iTerm iInsurance

i and iHealth iInsurance iof ipolicybazaar”

Towards ipartial ifulfillment iof

Integrated iMaster iof iBusiness iAdministration i(IMBA)

(BBD iUniversity, iLucknow)

i

SubmittedTo: Submittedby:

Mr. iAbdullah iShadab Abhishek ikumar

(AssistantProfessor) Rollno.1190672007

Session i2021-2022

School iof
i

i Management

Babu iBanarasi iDas iUniversity

Sector iI, iDr. iAkhilesh iDas iNagar, iFaizabad iRoad, iLucknow i(U.P.)
iIndia
BBD
UNIVERSITY
LUCKNOW

Certificate
This iis ito icertify ithat iMr.ABHISHEK iKUMAR, istudent iof iMBA iIX iSemester, iSession
i2021–22 iof iBabu iBanarasi iDas iUniversity, ihas isuccessfully icompleted ithe iIndustrial
iInternship iReport.

HistopicoftheIndustrialInternshipReportis“A
i StudyonFinancialStatement,TermInsuranceandHealthInsuranceof
i policybazaar”.

……………….……………. ………………………………….
FacultyMentor-SOM Dean/ iIncharge-SOM

Place: Lucknow
Date: iDecember i15th,2020

BABU iBANARASI iDAS iUNIVERSITY

BBD iCity, iFaizabad iRoad, iLucknow i- i226 i028 iU.P.
i(INDIA) iWebsite: iwww.bbdu.ac.in
 DECLARATION

I ido ihereby i ideclare i ithat i iall i ithe i iwork i ipresented i iin i ithe i iresearch i ireport

ientitled i i“A iStudy ion iFinancial iStatement, iTerm iInsurance iand iHealth

iInsurance iof ipolicybazaar” iis icarried iout i iand i ibeing i isubmitted i iat i ithe i ischool

iof imanagement i ifor ithe iaward iof iIntegrated iMaster iof iBusiness iAdministration, iis i

ian i iauthentic i irecord iof iABHISHEK iKUMAR. iThe iwork iis icarried iout iunder ithe

iguidance iof iMr. iABDULLAH iSHADAB i(faculty iguide). iIt ihasn‘t ibeen isubmitted

iat ianyother

place ifor iany iother iacademic ipurpose.

ABHISHEK iKUMAR
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

It igives ime imassive ijoy ito ithank ieach ione iof ithe iindividuals iwho ihave ihelped ime

ithroughout imy iexamination istudy. iI iam igrateful ito ithe iSchool iof iManagement,

iBabu iBanarasi iDas iUniversity, iLucknow ifor ihaving iallowed ime ithe iconsent ito

iwork ifor ithis iResearch iReport. iI imight iwant iaccept ithis iopen idoor ito

icommunicate imy iprofound ifeeling iof iappreciation ito iMr. iAbdullah iShadab

i(Professor iand iFaculty iGuide) iSchool iof iManagement, iBabu iBanarasi iDas

iUniversity, iLucknow ifor ihis isuffering imotivation, idirection, iintriguing iproposals,

ientire ihearted ibacking iand iall ihis imomentous itolerance, ihonorability iand

igraciousness iwhich iempowered ime ito igo ithrough ieffectively ia idecent inumber iof

iimportant itribulations. iI irecall iwith ithe ifeeling iof iextraordinary icompletion iProf.

iDr. iSushil iPande i(Dean) iSchool iof iManagement, iBabu iBanarasi iDas iUniversity,

iLucknow iimportant isupport iand icollaboration. iI iaccept ithis iopen idoor ito

icommunicate imy igenuine igratitude ito ilegitimate istaff iof iSchool iof iManagement,

iBabu iBanarasi iDas iUniversity, iLucknow ifor itheir ibunch ibacking iand ico-activity

iduring imy iexaminationwork.

At ilast, iI iadditionally iowe ia ilot ito imy iDear iFather, iDear iMother, iHusband iMother

iin ilaw iand igenerally ispeaking imy idarling ichild ifor iholding ion ifor imy idistraction

iwith ithis iexamination ireport iand isolidified ihelp iand isupport. iBy iand iby, iI ithank

iwho ilegitimately iand iin ia iroundabout iway ihelped ime iin ifinishing ithis iwork.

ABHISHEK i iKUMAR
 TABLE iOF iCONTENT

iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii Certificate i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i
i
i

Declaration i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i ii

Acknowledgement iiiiiiii iii

Sr. No. Topic Page ino.

1. Introduction 1

2. Literature iReview 22

3. Objective iof ithe iResearch 36

4. Research iMethodology 38

5. Data iAnalysis iand iInterpretation 42

6. Limitations 65

7. Findings 67

8. Suggestions/Recommendation 71

9. Conclusions 73

10. Bibliography 75

11. Annexure 77
 CHAPTER-
1INTRODUCTION

1
 INTRODUCTION iTO iTHE iCOMPANY

Policybazaar
Type Private

Industry Financial iTechnology

Founded June i2008

Founder Yashish iDahiya

i Alok iBansal
i Avaneesh
i Nirjar
Headquarters Gurugram, iHaryana,
iIndia

Number iof iemployees 10,001+

Website policybazaar.com
PolicyBazaar iis ian iIndian iprotection iaggregator iand ia iworldwide imonetary

iinnovation istartup. iThe iorganization iwas iestablished iin iJune i2008 iby iYashish

iDahiya, iAlok iBansal iand iAvaneesh iNirjar. iIt igives ian iadvanced istage i- isite iand

iapplication i- iwhere iclients ithink iabout imonetary iadministrations ifrom isignificant

iinsurance iagencies. iThe istartup iis isettled iin iGurugram, iHaryana, iIndia iand iis ithe

ination's ibiggest iprotection iaggregator. iThe igathering ihas iadditionally iextended

iactivities ito ithe iUnited iArab iEmirates.

Building ia isecurity inet ifor i250 imillion ior imore ifamilies iin iIndia.

In i2008, iprotection iclients iin iIndia iwere iconfronting ia idifficult istretch. iThere

iwas iabsence iof idata ion iitems, istraightforwardness iwas imissing, imis-selling iwas

iwild, ithere iwas ia ihigh ipass ipace iof iprotection iarrangements iand icustomers ifelt

ian ioverall ialoofness itowards ithe iprotection ibusiness. iInsurance iagencies imade

ibenefits ifrom istrategy igive iup icharges iand ithe iwhole ibusiness iwas iburied iin

idinkiness.

That iis ithe ipoint iat iwhich ia ilittle ibundle iof iindividuals, iwith ino iprotection

iexperience, ibegun ireconsidering iwhat ithe iprotection ispace icould ibe. iThey

ienvisioned ia ispot iwhere icustomers icould idiscover itotally istraightforward

iprotection idata, iand ian ialternative ito iresearch iand ithink iabout iprotection iitems iso

ithey icould ipurchase iwhat ithey itruly ineeded ito. iA ispot iwhere iall iinterchanges

iwould ibe irecorded iso ithat ithere iwould ibe ian iunmistakable ireview itrail iof iwho

isaid iwhat iin ian iitem ias iperplexing ias iprotection. iA ispot ithat ioffered ia itypical

iassistance ilayer ifor iall icustomer iadministrations iand icases.

With ithis iterrific idesire ias itheir iall iconsuming ipurpose, ithis idiverse igroup iof

iindividuals ibegan itheir iexcursion iinto iwhat iis icurrently iPolicybazaar.com.

Policybazaar.com iis ipresently iIndia's iprincipal iprotection iaggregator iand ia

imain ifintech iplayer iaround ithe iworld. iThe igoal iis ithe iequivalent ieven itoday i-

iCustomer iFirst iand iSustained iProfitability ifor ithe iwhole iprotection ibiological

isystem.

It's ia ifine idifficult iexercise iwhen i8,000,000 iprotection ipurchasers iand i40+ iback

iup iplans iexecute ia icouple iof ilac icrores iof iprotection icover iand itwo ior ithree

ithousand icrores iof iprotection ipremium ion ia istage iwith icomplete icertainty

iconsistently.

Single ilargest iinsurance idistributor

We iare ithe isingle ilargest idistributors iof iinsurance iin iIndia ioutside iof ibanks.

iThis iincludes iboth ionline iand ioffline ichannels.

Consistently igrowing iat i100%

Since iour iinception iin i2008, iwe ihave inot ionly iensured i100% iyear-on-year igrowth

ibut ihave ialso ibeen iprofitable ion iour ioperations iside ithroughout iour ijourney.

Over i100 imillion ivisitors ia iyear

We ihost iover i100 imillion ivisitors ia iyear ito iour iplatform iseeking iinformation ion

iinsurance. iThat iis ialmost i4 itimes ithe ipopulation iof iAustralia! iWe iget iabout

i2,73,973 ivisitors iin ia iday iand iabout i11,416 ivisitors ievery ihour.
400,000 iinsurance ipolicies isold ievery imonth

Every imonth ihundreds iof ithousands iof iinsurance ipolicies iare isold ithrough ius.

iThis imeans inearly i555 ipeople iare ibeing iprotected ithrough ius ievery ihour.

1/4th iof iIndia's ilife icover

Every isecond iTerm iLife ipolicy iis ibought ithrough iour iplatform. iIn ilittle iover ia

idecade, iwe inow iaccount ifor i25% iof iIndia's ilife icover.
10 imillion iunique icustomers

In i2014, iour itarget iwas ito ireach i10 imillion icustomers iby i2020, iwe iaccomplished

ithat ifeat iin iFY i2019, iwith ia iyear ito ispare!

Our iMission

Building ia isafety inet ifor i250 imillion iplus ihouseholds iin iIndia.

Our iValues
Fairness ito iall iour istakeholders

Our iVision

A ihealthy iand iwell-protected iIndia.

Policybazaar.com i('Website') iperceives ithe isignificance iof ikeeping iup iyour isecurity.

iPolicybazaar.com iis iresolved ito ikeep iup ithe iclassification, iuprightness iand isecurity iof
Restorative iACTIONS iAND iIMPROVEMENTS:

• Company iwill ikeep ia iframework ito itrack iand imanage iissues iin iIP

iinsurance, ithe iboard iand iconsistence ifound ithrough ithe ichecking icycle. iThe iglobal

ipositioning iframework iwill irecognize ithe irestorative imove ito ibe imade, ithe

itimetable, iand ithe iparty iinquestion.

• Company iwill icreate iand iexecute ia iyearly ior iother icustomary iimprovement

iplan ifor iIP isecurity, ithe iboard, iandconsistence.

• In iinstance iof iinfringement/encroachment iof iany iIPR, ifor iexample, ibrand

iname iencroachment iby iany iworker/agent ior iany ioutsider iencroaching iupon ithe

iIPR iof ithe iCompany, ithe iCompliance iTeam iof ithe iCompany iwould iinitially

iexplore ithe iissue iin irelationship iwith iits iAdvocates iand imake iproposals ito ithe

iDirector/CFO ifor igoal iof isuch iinfringement/encroachment iincluding ineed ifor iany

ilawfulgame-plan.

IP iLicensing iand iTransfer

• The iCompany imay ipermit iits iIP ito iany iof iits iSubsidiaries, iAffiliates ior ian

ioutsider i(ies) ithrough idifferent imethods iof iauthorizing isystem, ifor iexample,

iExclusive ipermitting, iSole ipermitting, iNon-Exclusive iLicensing, iSub-authorizing

iand iauthorizing iby iand ilarge. iThe iCompany iwill ireport isuch iIP ipermitting ithrough

ia ipermit iAgreement iwhere ieach isuch ipermit iarrangement iwill icharacterize ithe

iterms iand iconditions ifor ithe icorrect iutilization iof iIP iof itheCompany.

• The iCompany imay imove iits iIP ito iany iof iits iSubsidiaries, iAffiliates ior ian

ioutsider i(ies) ithrough ia iconsented ito iIP imove iarrangement ion ithe iconditions ias

imight ibe iconsidered ito ibe ifit iand iappropriate ito itheCompany.

Purview

This iPolicy iwill ibe iadministered iby ithe ilaws iof iRepublic iof iIndia iand ithe icourts iat
iGurgaon, iHaryana iwill ihave ithe ipurview ito ithe iequivalent.
PROCESS iOF iTHE iSTUDY

In ithis iresearch imy iresearch iobjective iwas ito icompare ithe iperformance iof iLIC

iand iPrivate iinsurance icompanies. iFor ithis ipurpose iI idecided ithe ifour ibroad

icategories iunder iwhich iI ihave icompared ithe iLIC iand iPrivate iinsurance

icompanies. iThese iare:

1. Size

2. Growth

3. Productivity

4. Grievance iHandling

Under ithese iBroad iCategories iI ihave ianalyzed i13 ifactors iwhich iare:

1. Size

 TotalPremium

 Total iIncome

 Size iof iBalanceSheet

 Total inumber iofPolicies

 Total inumber iofBranches

2. Growth

 Growth iinPremium

 Growth iinIncome

 Growth iin inumber iofPolicies

 Growth iin iMarketshare

3. Productivity

 Business iper iBranch

 Income iper iBranch

 New iPremium iperBranch

4. Grievance iHandling

I ihave iused ithe iSecondary idata iof ilast ifive ifinancial iyears. iI ihave icollected idata

ifrom ithe ivarious ibalance isheet iof iLIC iand iother iprivate iinsurance icompanies,

iweb isites iI itried ito ifind iout imost iof ithe iinformation irequired ito icompare ithe iLIC

iand iprivate iinsurance icompanies. iIn iAnalysis iI ihave ifound iall ithe irequired idata

iand ion ithe ibasis iof iperformance igave ithe irank ito iLIC iand iPrivate iInsurance

iCompanies ion ieach ifactor iand ithen ipoints. iNow ithese iPoints ihave ibeen imultiplied

iwith ithe iweightage iof ithat ifactor. iAnd ithen iafter ithe ianalysis iof ieach ifactor ia

iconsolidated ipoint itable ihas ibeen iprepared ito iknow ithat iwhich isector iis

iperforming ibetter ithan iother. iThe iWeightage ifor idifferent icategories iare:

Factors Weightage

Size 25%

A. iTotal iPremium 5%

B. iTotal iIncome 5%

C. iBalance iSheet iSize

5%

D. iTotal iNo. iof iPolicies

 5%

E. iTotal iNo. iof iBranches

5%

Growth 40%

A. iFirst iPremium

10%

B. iGrowth iin iIncome

10%

C. iIncrease iin iNo. iof iPolicies 10%

D. iGrowth iin iMarket iShare

10%

Productivity

15%

A. iBusiness iper iBranch

5%

B. iIncome iPer iBranch 5%

C. iFirst iPremium iper iBranch 5%

Grievance iHandling 20%

CONCEPT iOF iINSURANCE

Life ihas ialways ibeen ian iuncertain ithing. iTo ibe isecure iagainst iunpleasant

ipossibilities ialways irequires ithe iutmost iresourcefulness iand iforesight ion ithe ipart iof

iman. iTo ipray ior ito ipay ifor iprotection iis ithe ispirit iof ithe ihumanity. iMan ihas ibeen

iused ito ipray iGod ifor iprotection iand isecurity ifrom itime iimmemorial. iIn imodern

idays iInsurance iCompanies iwant ihim ito ipay ifor iprotection iand isecurity. iThe

iinsurance iman isays i"God ihelps ithose iwho ihelp ithemselves" iprobably ihe iis icorrect.

iToo imany ipeople iin ithis icountry iare inot iin iemployment iand iwork ifor itoo imany

ino ilonger iguarantees iincome isecurity. iSeveral imillions iare ipart-time iself iemployed

iand ilow-earning iworkers iliving iunder ipitiable icircumstances iwhere ithere iis ino

isecurity icover iagainst irisk. iFurther ithe iinherent ichanging iemployment irisks ithe

iprospect iof icontinual ichange iin ithe iwork iplace iwith iits iattendant ithreats iof

iunemployment iand ilow ipay iespecially iafter ithe iadoption iof iNew iEconomic iPolicy

iand ithe iimminent ilife icycle irisks i- ia inew isource iof iinsecurity iwhich iincludes ithe

ichanging idemands iof ifamily ilife, iseparation, idivorce iand ielderly idependents iare

idistressing ithe isociety. iRisk ihas ibecome icentral ito ione's ilife. iIt iis iwithin ithis

ibackground ilife iinsurance ipolicy ihas ibeen iintroduced iby ithe iinsurance icompanies

icovering irisks iat ivarious ilevels. iIt iis ia imeasure iof isocial isecurity ito ilivelihood

iliving iand iright ito ilivelihood ia imeans ifor isustenance. iTherefore iit igoes iwithout

isaying ithat ian iappropriate ilife iinsurance ipolicy iwithin ithe ipaying icapacity iand

imeans iof ithe iinsured ito ipay ipremium iis ione iof ithe isocial isecurity imeasures

ienvisaged iunder ithe iIndian iConstitution. iMan ifinds ihis isecurity iin iincome iwhich

ienables ihim ito ibuy ifood, iclothing, ishelter iand iother inecessities iof ilife. iA iperson

ihas ito iearn iincome inot ionly ifor ihimself ibut ialso ifor ihis idependents iviz. iwife iand

ichildren.
Origin iof iInsurance

PRACTICE iOF iINSURANCE iIN iINDIA: i1818-1956

It iis iclaimed ithat iinsurance iwas ipracticed iin iIndia ieven iin iVedic itimes iin ione iform

ior ithe iother. iThe iSanskrit iterm i"Yogakshema" iin ithe iRigveda imeant isome ikind iof

iinsurance iwhich iwas ipracticed iby ithe iAryans iin iIndia inearly i3000 iyears iago.

iDuring ithe iMughal iperiod iinsurance itook ifirm iroots. iThere iare ieven ireferences ito

ithe icover iagainst iwar irisks. iLosses idue ito ithe ipassage iof iroyal itroops ithrough

ifarms iwere icompensated iby ithe iState ias ia igesture iof igoodwill. iThe iyear i1818 iis

ian iepoch i-making iyear iin ithe ihistory iof iour icountry. iThe ifirst iLife iInsurance

iCompany ion iIndia isoil iappears ito ihave ibeen istarted iin ithis iyear. iA igroup iof

iEuropeans ipioneered ithe iestablishment iof ithe iOriental iLife iInsurance iSociety ito

iafford irelief ito ithe idistressed irelatives iof iEuropean. iThe iventure iwas inot iquite

isuccessful ibut ithe icompany iwas ireformed iin i1829.The irenewed iCompany ialso igot

iinto itrouble iin i1833 iwhen iAgency iHouse iof iCalcutta ipartners iof ithe isame ifell.

iPrince iDwarkanath iTagore iwas ithe ionly isolvent ipartner i& ithe isole iresponsibility

ifor icarrying ion ithe iinstitution ideveloped ion ihim. iMeanwhile iearly iin iJanury1834

ithe iGovernment imade iup iits imind ito iestablish ia iPublic iInsurance iCompany i& ia

iCommittee iwas iset iup ifor ithis ipurpose i.A inumber iof iforeign iInsurance iCompanies

ithen ioperating iin ithe icountry iviewed ithis imove iwith ialarm. iThey iset iup

iCommittees iof itheir iown ienquire iinto itheir iindividual iaffairs. iDwarkanath iTagore

itoo ihad ia iCommittee iappointed ito ilook iinto ithe iaffairs iof ithe iOriental. iAs ia iresult

ianother icompany iwas iborn iout iof ithe iprevious ione iin ithe iname iof i"New iOriental

iCompany" iIn ithe ireorganization iof ithe i"Oriental" iin ithe iyear i1834 itwo iother

igentlemen iwere iassociated. iOne iwas iRamtanu iLahiri iand ithe iother iRustamjee

iCowasjee. iThe ilatter iwas ianother iprominent ifigure iof ithe ibusiness iworld.

iRustamjee ientered iinsurance ibusiness iin i1828 ihe iwas ialready iknown ito ithe
icommunity iand ithe
Bombay iWestern iIndia iSatara, iwere ifloated ibefore ithe iwar ibut iby i1919 icompanies

ilike iJupiter iGeneral iNew iIndia iVulcan iInsurance iCompany ietc. icame iinto ibeing.

iPandit iK.Santhanam iwith iblessing iof iLala iLajpat iRai iand iPandit iMotilal iNehru

istarted iLaxmi iInsurance iCo. iSimilarly iAndhra iInsurance iwas istarted i iin

iMasulipatnam, iwith ithe iinitiative iof istalwarts ilike iDr. iPattabhi iSitaramaiah. iFrom

ipolitical iplatforms ialso inational ileaders isupported ithis icause. iIt iis iduty ito ievery

iIndian ito isupport ionly iIndian iInsurance. iThe ikeynote iof iour iSwaraj iis iin iplacing

iall iour iinsurance iwith iour iIndian icompanies" isaid iMahatma iGandhi iin ihis

imessage. i"I ihope iIndians iwill irealize ithe iimportance iof ipatriotism ionly ithrough

iIndian iinsurance iinstitution" istated iPandit iJawaharlal iNehru. iThus ithe icause iof

iIndian iinsurance ibecame ia inational iissue. iThe ipursuit ito iboost iIndian iinsurance

irepresented ia icrusade ito iextricate ithe iIndian ieconomy ifrom iforeigndomination.

PROGRESS iIN iINSURANCE iBUSINESS

The igrowth iof iLife iInsurance iin iconcrete iterms icould ibe isaid ito ibeing iduring ithe

ifirst itwo idecades iof itwentieth icentury iwhen imost iof ithe imajor icompanies iwere

ifounded. iThey igrew iin iterms iof irise iin ithe inumber iof icompanies iin iterms iof

inumber iof ipolicies iand isum iassured ias iwell ias itotal ilife ifund. iIndian iInsurance

iYear iBook ipublished ifor ithe ifirst itime iin i1914 igives ithe ifigure iof ithe itotal

ibusiness-in i-force ias i22.44 icrore iwhich igrew ito iRs. i298 icrore iin i1938. iIn i1914

ithere iwere ionly i44companies itransacting iinsurance ibusiness iin iIndia iand iduring

ithe inext i25 iyears itheir inumber irose ito i176. iThe itotal iprogress ion iall ithe iprimary

iheads iviz. ilife ifund i(Rs. i50.50 icrore) ipremium iincome i(Rs. i10.50 icrore) iand inew

ibusiness i(Rs. i43.30 icrore) iindicate ithat iIndian iInsurance iBusiness ihad ibeen

imaking ia idefinite iheadway iduring ithis iyear. iThe iinter-war-

yearsthussawrapidgrowthlifeinsuranceinIndia.Thepromotionofnew
life iinsurance icompanies icontinued ito ibe ialmost ia icraze iand iinsurance icompanies

imushroomed. iIn ithis iperiod i176 iinsurance icompanies iwere iformed iand imany iof

ithem ifailed. iThus iunhealthy igrowth iwas iharmful ito ithe iinterest iof ithe ipolicy

iholders iand iinsurance ibusiness iin iIndia. iFeeling iconcerned iabout iit ithe iAll iIndia

iLife iAssurance iOffices' iAssociation iurged iupon ithe iGovernment iin i1932 ito

iundertake ithe iinsurance ilegislation ito

(a) Compulsorily iregister iall iLife iInsurance icompanies.

(b) Secure ia ideposit iof iRs.2 ilakh ifrom iall iLife iInsurancecompanies.

(c) Compel iforeign icompanies idoing ibusiness iin iIndia ito ikeep isufficient

ifunds iin iIndia isecurities ito imeet itheir iliabilities iunder iall ipolicies iissued

iinIndia.

INSURANCE iACT, i1938

The iInsurance iAct, i1938, iwas ithe ifirst icomprehensive ilegislation igoverning inot

ionly ilife ibut ialso inon- ilife ibranches iof iinsurance ito iprovide istrict istate icontrol

iover iinsurance ibusiness. iIn isub- isections ito idealt iwith iprovident icompany‘s imutual

ioffices iand ico-operative isocieties ias iwell.

The isilent ifeatures iof ithe iAct iwere ias ifollows:

(A) Constitution iof ia iDepartment iof iInsurance iunder ia isuperintendent ivested iwith

iwide ipowers iof isupervision iand icontrol iover iall ikinds iof iinsurancecompanies.

(B) Regulation ifor ithe icompulsory iregistration iof iinsurance icompanies iand ifor

ifiling iof ireturns iof iinvestment iand ifinancialconditions.

(C) Provisions ifor ideposit ito iprevent iinsurers iof iinadequate ifinancial iresources iof

ispeculative iconcerns ifor icommencingbusiness.

(D) Provisions ithat i55% iof ithe inet ilife ifund iof ian iIndian ior inon- iIndian iinsurer

ishould iinvest iin iIndian iGovernment iand iapproved isecurities iwith iat ileast i25%in
to ipolicy iholders iwithout iinterruption iwere itheir imajor iconcerns. iThe iactual iwork

iof iintegration ihad ito iawait ilegislation. iThe icustodians imanaged ithe iinsurance

icompanies itill i1-09-1956 iwhen iLife iInsurance iCorporation iwas iestablished iunder

ithe igeneral idirection iand icontrol iof ithe iMinistry iof iFinance. iThe iOrdinance

iprovided ifor ithe itransfer iof ithe icontrol iof i154 iIndian iinsurers i16 inon iIndian

iinsurers iand i75 iprovident isocieties. iThese iarrangements iwere idesigned ito iensure

ithat ino iinconvenience iwhatsoever iwas icaused ito ithe ipolicy iholders. iWith ithe

iGovernment itake iover ithe imanagement iaimed itowards ithe ievolution iof ia icommon

iuniform ipremium irate ipolicy iconditions iand iservice iand iworking iprocedures iand

iabove iall ito ihelp ipromote iteam ispirit. iThe icorporation ia ibody icorporate ishall

iconsist iof inot imore ithan i15 imembers iappointed iby ithe iCentral iGovernment ione iof

ithem ibeing iappointed iby ithe igovernment ias ichairman. iThe icapital iof ithe

icorporation iwas iat iRs i5 icrore iprovided iby ithe icentral igovernment.

INSURANCE iSECTOR iREFORMS

In i1993, iMalhotra iCommittee iheaded iby iformer iFinance iSecretary iand iRBI iGovernor

R.N. iMalhotra iwas iformed ito ievaluate ithe iIndian iInsurance iindustry iand

irecommended iits ifuture idirection. iThe iMalhotra icommittee iwas iset iup iwith ithe

iobjective iof icomplementing ithe ireforms iinitiated iin ithe ifinancial isector. iThe

ireforms iwere iaimed iat i"creating ia imore iefficient iand icompetitive ifinancial isystem

isuitable ifor ithe irequirements iof ithe ieconomy ikeeping iin imind ithe istructural

ichanges icurrently iunderway iand irecognizing ithat iinsurance iis ian iimportant ipart iof

ithe ioverall ifinancial isystem iwhere iit iwas inecessary ito iaddress ithe ineed ifor isimilar

ireforms‖. iIn i1994 ithe icommittee isubmitted ithe ireport iand isome iof ithe ikey

irecommendationsincluded
(1) STRUCTURE

 Government istake iin ithe iInsurance iCompanies ito ibe ibrought idown ito50%.

 Government ishould itake iover ithe iholdings iof iGIC iand iits isubsidiaries iso

ithat ithese isubsidiaries ican iact ias iindependentcorporations.

 All ithe iinsurance icompanies ishould ibe igiven igreater ifreedom itooperate

(2) COMPETETION

 Private iCompanies iwith iminimum ipaid iup icapital iof iRs.1 ibn ishould ibe

iallowed ito ienter itheindustry.

 No iCompany ishould ideal iin iboth iLife iand iGeneral iInsurance ithrough ia

isingle ientry.

 Foreign iCompanies imay ibe iallowed ito ienter ithe iindustry iin icollaboration

iwith ithe idomesticcompanies.

 Postal iLife iInsurance ishould ibe iallowed ito ioperate iin ithe iruralmarket.

 Only ione iState iLevel iLife iInsurance iCompany ishould ibe iallowed ito

ioperate i iin ieach istate.

(3) REGULATORYBODY

 The iInsurance iAct ishould ibechanged

 An iInsurance iRegulatory iBody ishould ibe isetup.

 Controller iof iInsurance i(Currently ia ipart ifrom ithe iFinance iMinistry)should

ibe imade iindependent

(4) INVESMENTS

 Mandatory iInvestments iof iLIC iLife iFund iin igovernment isecurities ito ibe

ireduced ifrom i75% ito i50%.

 GIC iand iits isubsidiaries iare inot ito ihold imore ithan i5% iin ianycompany.
(5) CUSTOMERSERVICE

 LIC ishould ipay iinterest ion idelays ion ipayments ibeyond i30days.

 Insurance iCompanies imust ibe iencouraged ito iset iup iunit ilinked ipensionplans

 Computerization iof ioperations iand iupdating iof itechnology ito ibe icarried iout

iin ithe iinsuranceindustry.

The icommittee iemphasized ithat iin iorder ito iimprove ithe icustomer iservice iand

iincrease ithe icoverage iof iinsurance iindustry ishould iopened iup ito icompetition. iBut

iat ithe isame itime ithe icommittee ifelt ithe ineed ito iexercise icaution ias iany ifailure ion

ithe ipart iof inew iplayers icould ispoil ithe ipublic iconfidence iin ithe iindustry. iHence iit

iwas idecided ito iallow icompetition iin ia ilimited iway iby istipulating ithe iminimum

icapital irequirement iof iRs. i100 icrores. iThe icommittee ifelt ithe ineed ito iprovide

igreater iautonomy ito iinsurance icompanies iin iorder ito iimprove itheir iperformance

iand ienable ithem ito iact ias iindependent icompanies iwith ieconomic imotives. iFor ithis

ipurpose iit ihad iproposed isetting iup ian iindependent iregulatory ibody.

Liberalization

OPENING iUP iOF iINSURANCE iSECTOR i– i1999 iTHE

iINSURANCE iREGULATORY iAND iDEVELOPMENT

iAUTHORITY

Reforms iin ithe iInsurance isector iwere iinitiated iwith ithe ipassage iof ithe iIRDA iBill

iin iParliament iin iDecember i1999. iThe iIRDA isince iits iincorporation ias ia istatutory

ibody iin iApril i2000 ihas icarefully istuck ito iits ischedule iof iframing iregulations iand

iregistering ithe iprivate isector iinsurance icompanies. iThe iother idecision itaken

isimultaneously ito iprovide ithe isupporting isystems ito ithe iinsurance isector iand iin
iparticular ithe ilife iinsurance icompanies iwas ithe ilaunch iof ithe iIRDA's ionline

iservice ifor iissueand

renewal iof ilicenses ito iagents. iThe iapproval iof iinstitutions ifor iimparting itraining ito

iagents ihas ialso iensured ithat ithe iinsurance icompanies iwould ihave ia itrained

iworkforce iof iinsurance iagents iin iplace ito isell itheir iproducts iwhich iare iexpected ito

ibe iintroduced iby iearly inext iyear. iSince ibeing iset iup ias ian iindependent istatutory

ibody ithe iIRDA ihas iput iin ia iframework iof iglobally icompatible iregulations. iIn ithe

iprivate isector i14 ilife iinsurance icompanies ihave ibeen iregistered.

ENTRY iOF iPRIVATE iCOMPANIES

Under ithe iIRDA iAct, iprivate icompanies ican inow ioperate iin iIndia's iinsurance

iindustry. iHowever ithey imust iobtain ia ilicense ifrom ithe iIRDA ibefore ibeing

ipermitted ito iwrite ibusiness. iTo ihave iits ilicense iapplication iconsidered ia idomestic

iprivate icompany imust ibe iregistered iin iaccordance iwith ithe iCompanies iAct iof

i1956 iand ihave iapproximately iUS$ i20 imillion iof iinvestment icapital. iThe ispecific

ilicensing irequirements ithat iPrivate iIndian iCompanies imust ifulfill iare iset iforth iin

ithe iRegistration ion iIndian iInsurance iCompanies iRegulations ipublished iby ithe

iIRDA i2000.

LIFTING iOF iBARRIERS iTO iFOREIGN iINVESTMENT

The iIRDA iAct ialso ilifts icertain ibarriers ito iforeign idirect iinvestment iin iIndian

iinsurance iindustry. iGlobal iinsurers iare inow ipermitted ito iset iup iand iregister ia i

idomestic icompany iin iorder ito iwrite ibusiness iin iIndia. iHowever iregulations

istipulate ithat ithey ihave ia icapital ibase iof iat ileast iUS i$ i20 imillion iand itheir

iinvestment iin isuch icompany iis icapped iat i26 ipercent. iThus ito iparticipate iin ithe

imarket ithey imust iform ia

ijointventurewithanIndianpartnerthatisabletoinvesttheremainingfunds.
LITERATURE REVIEW
i
Critical iLegal ianalysis iof iLife iand iHealth iInsurance iPolicies.

Not imany ipolicy iholders iare iaware ithat iwhen ithey ipurchase ian iinsurance

ipolicy ithey ienter iinto ia icontract iwith ithe iinsurer. iThey iare igenerally iof ithe

iopinion ithat ithey ihave ipurchased ia iproduct ifrom ithe iinsurer iand iif iany

icontingency iarises ithey ior itheir ibeneficiaries iwill iget imoney ifrom ithe

icompany. iThis iis ithe ilayman‘s iunderstanding iof iinsurance. iBut, iin ireality

iinsurance ipolicy iis ia icontract ibetween ithe iinsured iand ithe iinsurer. iUnder isuch

icircumstances ia iquestion ithat imay iarise ifor iconsideration iis iwhether ithe iterms

iand iconditions iof ithe ipolicy iare iaccording ito itheir iwish. iGen.Assce.Society iLtd

iv.Chandmull iJain1 ithe iissue iwhich iwas iconsidered iby ithe iSupreme iCourt iis

iwhether ian iinsurance icontract ican ihave ia iclause igiving iright ito ithe iparties ito

icancel ithe iInsurance iPolicy. iThe iCourt iheld ithat iit iwas inot iillegal ito ihave isuch

ia iclause iand iobserved ithat iin iinterpreting ithe idocuments irelating ito icontract iof

iinsurance, ithe iduty iof ithe icourt iis ito iinterpret ithe iwords iin iwhich ithe icontract

iis iexpressed iby ithe iparties ibecause iit iis inot ifor ithe icourt ito imake ia inew

icontract, ihowever ireasonable, iif ithe iparties ihave inot imade iit ifor ithemselves.

iThe ilaw idoes inot ipermit ithe iparties ito ienter iinto icontract ifor iany ifraudulent

iact ior ithe iperformance iof iwhich iwill iinjure ithe ilife iand iproperty iof ianother ior

iopposed ito ipublic ipolicy ias icontained iin iSection i23 iof iIndian iContract iAct

i18722 i. iContracts ishould ibe iwithin ithe ilegal iframework iand inot iopposed ito

ipublic ipolicy. iThen ithe ineed ifor idefining ipublic ipolicy iarises. iIn iCentral

iInland iWater iTransport iCorporation iv. iBrojonath iGanguly3 iSupreme iCourt ihas

iobserved ithat―TheIndianContractActdoesnotdefine

itheexpression"publicpolicy"or i"opposed ito ipublic ipolicy". iFrom ithe ivery inature

iof ithings, isuch iexpressions iare iincapable iof iprecise idefinition. iPublic ipolicy,
ihowever, iis inot ithe ipolicy iof ia

iparticulargovernment.Itconnotessomematterwhichconcernsthepublicgood
agreement ihad ito ibe istrictly iconstrued ito idetermine ithe iextent iof ithe iliability iof

i ithe iinsurer. iIt iis idangerous ito irely iupon ithe imeaning iof ia iword iwithout itaking

iinto iaccount ithe icontext iin iwhich iit iappears‖. iThe imost iimportant ispecific

iapplication iof ithe icontract iprinciple iis ithe igusdem igenesis irule iof iconstruction

iwhich iprovides ithat iwhere igeneral iwords iare ilinked iwith iparticular iwords ithey

imust ibe iconstrued ias ilimited ito ithe isame igenus ias ithe iparticular iwords ias

iapplied ito ipolicies iin iinsurance. iWhere igeneral iwords ifollow ia ilist iof ispecific

imatters ithose imatters idictate ithe iambit iof ithe igeneral iwords. iEqually iwhere

igeneral iwords iare ifollowed iby ia ilist iof ispecific iillustrations, ithe igeneral iwords

iare ilimitedaccordingly.

Previous iinterpretation.

The ifirst iand ioverriding iconsideration iin iconstruing iany iphrase ior iform iof

iwords iin ipolicy iis ito iinquire iwhether ithere ihas ibeen ithe isubject iof iany iprior

idecision iby ia icourt. iThe iproper iconstruction ito ibe iplaced ion iwords iis ia imatter

iof ilaw ifor icourt.

iAclauseinapolicycannotbesaidtobe―preciselysimilar‖toanotherunlessitscontext iis

ithe isame. iWords iare ialways ito ibe iconstrued iin itheir icontext iand ia idifference

iin icontext iwill ioften iafford ivalid iground ifor idisagreeing iwith ian iearlier

idecision, ithough iit idealt iwith iwords iwhich ialso ioccur iin ithe ipolicy iunder

iconsideration. iA ipresumption iof ifact ior ilaw iwhich ihas igained irecognition iin

istatute ior iby isuccessive ijudicial ipronouncements ispread iover ithe iyears icannot

ibe istretched ibeyond ithe ilimits ipermitted iby ithe istatute ior ibeyond ithe

icontemplation ispelled iout ifrom ithe ilogic, ireason iand isense iprevailing iwith ithe

iJudges. iWhile idrafting ithe icontract ithe iinsurers ipredict ithat icertain iwords igive

iparticular imeaning iwith ian iidea iof ithe ibackground iand ithe iintention iof ithe

idrafter. iThe iintention iof iusing istandard iwords iis ithat ionce ithey ihad ibeen
iinterpreted iand igiven ia imeaning iby ia icourt iall icourts iwill ifollow ithe

isamemeaning.
Ordinary iMeaning.

There iis ia ipresumption ithat ithe iwords, ito ibe iconstrued ishould ibe iconstrued iin

itheir iordinary iand ipopular isense, isince ithe iparties ito ithe icontract imust ibe itaken

ito ibe ias ireasonable imen, ito iuse iwords iand iphrases iin itheir icommonly

iunderstood iand iaccepted isense. iInsurance ipolicy ishould ibe iconstrued iin

iaccordance iwith isound icommercial iprinciples iand igood ibusiness isense, iso ithat

iits iprovisions ireceive ia i ifair iand isensible iapplication. iIf ithe iwordings iof ia

iclause iare iambiguous iand imore ithan ireading iproduces ia ifairer iresult ithat ithe

ialternative, ithe ireasonable iinterpretation ishould ibe iaccepted. iAn iinteresting

iissue iarose iin ithe icase iofHooper

v. iAccidental iDeath iInsurance iCo i55 iwhere ia isolicitor iwas iinsured iunder ian

iaccident ipolicy iwhich ibound ithe iinsurers ito ipay ihim ia iweekly isum iif ian iinjury

iwasso iserious i―as iwholly ito idisable ihim ifrom ifollowing ihisusual ibusiness,

ioccupation ior ipursuits.‖ iThe iinsurer idisputed ithe iliability ion ithe iground ithat ihe

iwasnot iwhollydisabled, itakingthewords, i―as iwhollyto idisable‖,attheirface ivalue.

iThe icourt iheld ihowever, ithat ithe imeaning iof ithe iclause ilooked iat iin iits ientirety

iwas ithat ithe iassured ishould ibe idisabled ifrom iconducting ihis iusual ibusiness iin

ithe inormal imanner iand ithis imere ireasonable iconstruction iof ithe iclause iis ito

ibefollowed.

Special imeaning iof iwords.

A iword ior iphrase iwhich ihas ia irecognized itechnical imeaning iin ilaw iwill

iusually ibe itaken ito ibear ithat imeaning iand inot ia iwider ior inarrower ipopular

imeaning. iIf ithe iparties ihave iprovided iexpress idefinitions iin itheir ipolicy ifor

iparticular i iwords iwhich iare ialso itechnical ilegal iwords, itheir iown idefinition

imust iof icourse iprevail. iWhere ithere iis idoubt ias ito ithe imeaning iof ia iclause ior

iphrase ithe iwhole iof ithe ipolicy ishould ibe iexamined iin iorder ito isee iwhat
iintention ithe iparties iappearto
have ihad iconcerning ithe imatters igoverned iby ithe iwords iin iquestion iand iin

iorder ito idiscover ialso iwhether ithe isame iphrase ior iwords iappear ielsewhere iin

iit. iWords ishould inot ibe igiven ian iinterpretation iwhich inullifies iother iprovisions

iin ithe icontract iof iinsurance ior iwhich iinvolve idifferent imeanings ibeing

iattributed ito ithe isame iwords iin idifferent iparts iof ithe ipolicy, isince ithe isame

iwords ishould iprima ifacie idenote ithe isame imeaning ithroughout. iThe igeneral

irule iof iconstruction ithat iwhere igeneral iwords iare ilinked iwith iparticular iwords

ithey imust ibe iconstrued ias ilimited ito ithe isame igenus ias ithe iparticular iword

iapplies ito ipolicies iof iinsurance. iThe iparties ito ia ipolicy imay ihowever imake iit

iclear ithat ithe irule iis inot ito iapply.56 iIt iis ialso iimportant ito igive ieffect ito ia

iclause ieven ithough iit iis icontained iin ia iseparate islip iof ipaper ipasted ito ithe

ipolicy, iif iin ifact iit iforms ipart iof iit57 i.

Technical imeaning iof iwords.

Words iand iphrases imay ihave itechnical imeanings, iwhich iclash iwith iwhat imight

ibe ithought iof ias ithe iordinary imeaning iof ithe iwords. iWhether ior inot ithe icourt

iapplies itechnical irather ithan ithe iordinary imeaning iwill idepend ion ithe

icircumstances iof ithe iparticular ipolicy. iThe ifact ithat ithe iinsured iis iunaware iof

ithe itechnical imeaning iwill inot isway ithe icourt iin ihis ifavour, iif iit iis iclear ithat

ithe itechnical imeaning iis iappropriate iin ithat itype iof ipolicy. iOne iof ithe ibasic

irules iof icontract ilaw iis ithat ithere imust ibe icertainty iof iterms. iWithout icertainty

ithere icannot ibe ia itrue iagreement ibecause ithere iwill ibe ivagueness ipreventing

imeeting iof iminds. iOne iof ithe icategories iof iunfair iterms imost icommonly

iencountered iin iconsumer icontracts iis ione iwhere iconsumers iare ibound iby iterms

ithey icannot iget ito iknow ibefore isigning ithe icontract. iOne ianswer ito ithe iabove

iproblem iaddressed iby ithe iRegulator iinIndiaisprovidingfor―coolingoff‖

i periodconcept.Ifaworddoesnothaveany
iordinaryandpopularsensethetechnicalmeaningwillbeappropriate.Theweight
of iauthority iis iin ifavour iof ithe iproposition ithat ithe igeneral irule iis ithat ia

itechnical iterm imust ibe iconstrued iin iaccordance iwith iits itechnical imeaning iin

ithe irelevant itrade, iunless ithere iis isome icontextual ior iother ireason ifor ia

idifferent iapproach. iThe icourt iwill istrive ito iconstrue ithe ipolicy iso ias ito imake iit

ian ieffective ilegal idocument. iThe icourt iwill istrive ito igive isense ito ia icontract

iterm ieven ithough iits imeaning iis iobscure ias ithe ialternative iis ito iread iclause ias

ivoid ifor iuncertainty. iIn ithe icase iof iAviva iLife iInsurance iCo iPvt iLtd iv.

iVarghese iJoseph58 i, ithe iclaim iwas irepudiated iby ithe iInsurance iCompany ion

ithe iground ithat ithe idisease ifor iwhich ithe icomplainant itook itreatment iand

iincurred iexpenses iwas inot ia i―Critical iIllness‖covered iunder ithe ipolicy. iThe

iState iCommission iheld ithat ithe ivalve iis ionly ito iregulate ithe iblood isupply ito

ithe iheart iand iso inecessarily ihe iwas isuffering ifrom ia icritical iillness irelating ito

ithe iheart. iThe iinterpretation igiven ifor ivalve ireplacement iis ithat iof ithe

iJudiciary iand inot ithat iof ithe icontracting iparties. iThe iwordingof

―Valve ireplacement‖is inot imentioned iinthe ipolicyand iit iisonlythe ijudiciary

iwhich ihas iinterpreted ithe ipolicycondition.

Contra iproferentem.

In iSimmond iv. iCockell i59 iit iwas iheld ithat iwhere ia ipolicy iis iambiguous iit imust

ibe iconstrued iagainst ithe iparty iwho ihas idrafted iit ifor ihis iown iprotection. iIf

ithere iis iambiguity iin ithe iquestion iin ithe iproposal iform iit iwill ibe iconstrued

istrictly iagainst ithe iinsurer iwas ithe idecision iin iZurich iGeneral iAccident i&

iLiability iCo iLtd iv. iMorrison60 i. iThe ianswers ito ia iquestion iand iits

iimplications ineed ito ibe iinterpreted iin ithe isame isense iin iwhich iit iwas ifairly

iand ireasonably iunderstood iby ithe i iproposer ias iobserved iin iCondogianis iv.

iGuardian iAssurance iCo iLtd i61. iIn iprinciple ithe irule imay ioperate iagainst ithe

iinsured ialso iin iso ifar ias iwords, iphrases iand istatements ior iinformation iwhich
ihe ihas iaccepted iand iis iawareof iare
suppressed iby ithe iinsured. iNormally ithe irule iis inot iapplied iagainst ithe iinsured

ibecause ithe iproposer ionly ianswers ithe iquestion iprepared iby ithe iinsurer iand ithe

iinsured idoes inot idraft iany iquestion. iIn iEngland iif ithe icontract iis imade

ibetween iparties ihaving iequal ibargaining ipower ithe irule iis inot iapplicable,

iespecially iin icase iof icommercial iinsurance icontracts. iIn ithe iUnited iStates ithis

irule iis ijustified ias ian iequitable iresponse ito ithe istandard iform iof iContract. iThe

icourts itake ithis irule iof iinterpretation ioften ito iprotect ithe iinnocent iconsumer

iand inot ithe ibusiness itransactions iwhich ican ialways itake iprofessional iadvice.

iThe irule icontra iproferentem idoes inot ijustify ian iunreasonable iconstruction iin

iorder ito ifavour ithe iinsured. iIn iRajiv iKhosla iv. iUnion iof iIndia62 ithe ichallenge

ibefore ithe iHigh icourt iwasone iof ithe ipolicyconditionswhich ireadsasunder:―the

ipolicy ishall istand icancelled iin icase ithe ilife iassured ishall idie ibefore ithe

ideferred idate iand iin isuch ievent iprovided ithe ipolicy iis ithen iin ifull iforce ia isum

iof imoney iequal ito iall ithe ipremiums ipaid iwithout iany ideduction iwhatsoever

ishall ibecome ipayable ito ithe iperson ientitled ito ithe ipolicy imoneys‖ iThe iLearned

iSingle iJudge iheld ithat iif iLife iInsurance iCorporation ichooses ito iinsure ithe

ichildren iand icollect ipremia, ithere iis ino ijustification ito inegative ithe iclaim ion

ithe ibasis ithat ithe ipayments ithereunder ishould istand ipostponed ito ia ideferred

idate. iThis idecision iwas ichallenged ibefore i ithe iDivision iBench63 iwhich iset

iaside ithe iorder iof ithe iLearned iSingle iJudge iand iobserved ithat ithe iconditions

iincorporated iin ithe i"Jeevan iKishor iPolicy" iwithstand inuanced ijudicial iscrutiny

iand ido inot icause idiscomfort ito iArticle i14 iof ithe iConstitution iand

iallowedappeal.

Policy ito ibe ilooked iupon ias ia iwhole.

It iis iperfectly ipermissible ifor ithe iterms iof ithe icontract ito ibe ifound iin isome

iother idocument iwhich ihas ibeen iincorporated iby ireference iinto ithe icontract. iIt
iis
commonfortheproposaltobeincorporatedintothepolicybymeansofa―basis iof

icontract iclause‖ iso ithat ithe iprospect‘s ianswers ito iit iform iexpress iwarranties.

iBut iany idocuments iwhich ido inot iform ipart iof ithe icontract iand iare ionly iused

ias isale ipromotion imaterial ilike ibrochure, ipamphlets ietc ido inot iform ipart ipolicy

idocument. iThis iis iclear ifrom ithe iorders iof ithe iNCDRC iin iLife iInsurance

iCorporation iof iIndia iv. iPrashant iRamalingan iGaurav64 i. iIt iwill ialso ibe

i relevant ito inote ithe iprovisions iof ilaw iand ihow ithe icourts iin iUK iconsider ithese

iissues. iA iseller ior isupplier ishall iensure ithat iany iwritten iterm iof ia icontract iis

iexpressed iin iplain, iintelligible ilanguage, iand iif ithere iis idoubt iabout ithe

imeaning iof ia iwritten iterm, ithe iinterpretation imost ifavourable ito ithe iconsumer

ishall iprevail65. iThe idoctrine iof iprecedents iis ipart iof ithe ibedrock iof iEnglish

ilaw. iIf ia iword ior iphrase iin ia ipolicy ihas ibeen igiven ia iparticular imeaning ithen

ithere iwill ibe ian iendeavour iby ithe icourt ito ifollow ithat iinterpretation. iOne imore

iproblem iis ito idecide iwhat idocumentation ishould ibe itaken iinto iaccount ifor ithe

iconstruction. iObviously, ithe ipolicy iitself iis ithe icore idocument. iThe ifont isize iof

ithe ipolicy idocument ihas ibeen icriticized iby ithe ijudiciary ivery ioften. iA isimilar

iissue iwas idiscussed iin iKoskas iv. iStandard iMarine iIns iCo iLtd66 i. iSankey iJ

idisregarded ia iclause, ibecause iit iwas iin ivery ismall iprint. iOn iappeal ithis iview

iwas icensured, iat ileast ias iregards ithe iclause iin iquestion67 i. iThere iis ino irule

ithat ilarge iprint iis ito ibe ipreferred ito ismall iprint iand ia iclause imust inot ibe

iignored isimply ibecause iit iis idifficult ito iread, ialthough ithis ireasoning imay inow

ihave ibeen isuperseded iby ithe iprinciple ithat iunusual ior ionerous iterms imust ibe

ibrought ito ithe iexpress iattention iof ithe iother iparty. iThe iquestion iof ismall iprint

ihas ibeen icommented iupon iby ithe iIndian ijudiciary ialso. iEven ithough ithe ilaw

idoes inot icontemplate isize iof iprint, iit iis iin ithe iinterest iof iconsumers ithat ithe

iprint ineeds ito ibe ilegible iand ireadable. iMany iDistrict iForums ihavecommented
that iwhile ithe iresearcher iwas ipresenting icases ibefore ithe iForums ithey ineeded

ithe iassistance iof imagnifying iglass ito iread ithe ipolicy iconditions. iThis iwas

iindeed ia ivery iinteresting ipersonal iexperience ifor ithe iresearcher.

Specific iLife iInsurance iPolicy iconditions.

Now ilet ius isee isome iof ithe icommon iand istandard iconditions iand ihow ithey

ihave ihelped ithe iconsumer iand ithe iview itaken iby ithe iJudiciary. iBefore igoing

iinto ithe ilegal iissues iit iwill iworth ito iknow iwhether ithe iconsumer iinquire iabout

ithe iterms iand iconditions iof ithe igoods ior iservice ibefore itransaction iwas

icommenced. iAn iEmpirical iStudy iconducted iby ithe iCenter ifor iConsumer

iStudied, iIIPA i, i iNew iDelhi ishow ithat imore ithan ihalf i(58%) idid inot imake iany

ienquiry i23.1 ipercent iof ithe irespondents ienquired iabout iit isometimes iand ionly

i19 ipercent imade ienquiry ifrequently68.

Proof iof iAge: iThe ipremium ipayable iunder ia ilife iinsurance ipolicy iremains ithe

isame ithroughout ithe iterm iof ithe icontract. iAge iof ithe iinsured iplays ian

iimportant irole iin iarriving iat ithe ipremium iapart ifrom iother icomponents ilike

iSum iAssured, iPlan iand iTerm. iThe ilaw igives ian iopportunity ito irework ithe

ipremium iwhenever iit iis ifound ithat ithere iis ia idifference ibetween ithe iadmitted

iage iat ithe itime iof ientering iinto icontract iand ithe iactual iage iof ithe iLife iAssured

iat iany itime iduring ithe icurrency iof ithe icontract. iThis iis inormally idone iby

icreating ia icharge iover ithe iclaim ipayable. iAll iinsurance icompanies iin itheir

ipolicy ibond ihave imade ithis ipoint ivery iclear. iLegal ibasis ifor iincorporating isuch

ia iclause iwhile idrafting ithe iinsurance ipolicy imay ibe ithe iexception icontained iin

iSection i45 iof iInsurance iAct69 i. iNormally iage iis iaccepted ibased ion istandard

idocuments ilike iBirth iCertificate, iPassport, iVoter iIdentification icard, ior iSchool

icertificate. iIn irural iareas isuch idocuments imay inot ibe iavailable iwith ithe

iproposed iassured; ihence iself ideclaration iof iage iis ialso iaccepted iupto ia icertain

iamount iof iInsurance icover. iIt iis icommon iin iLife iinsurance ipolicies ito irestrict

iage iat ientry iand ialso imaturity iage. iAny iincorrect istatement iof iage iwill imake

ithe iinsurance iproduct iunavailable ito ithe iconcerned iindividual. iWhenever ithere

iis idifference ibetween ithe iactual iage iand ithe ideclared iage iin ithe iproposal, ithe

ipremium iwill ibe ireworked. iThe ipolicy iholder iis irequired ito ipay ithe idifference

iaccording ito ithe icorrect iage. iIf ialtered ipayment iis inot imade ithe isame iwill ibe

itreated ias idebt iand iwill ibe ideducted ifrom ithe iclaim ipayable ialong iwith

iinterest. iFurther iwhere ithe iage idoes inot ipermit ithe iissue iof ithe ipolicy, ia

isuitable ialternative ipolicy ias iprevalent ion ithe idate iof itaking ithe ipolicy ican ibe

ioffered iif ithe ilife iassured iis ialive ion idate iof idetection iofmistake.
Forfeiture iin icertain icases.

When ipremiums iare ipaid iregularly ithe icontract icontinues iand ion ithe ihappening

iof iContingency ithe iInsurance iCompany iis ibound ito idischarge iits ipart iof ithe

icontract iby imaking ipayment. iInsurance icontract iis ia iconditional icontract; ione

iof ithe iimportant iconditions iis ithat ithe iinsured ishall ikeep ipaying ithe ipremium

itill ithe istipulated idate. iIn icase ithe ipremium iis inot ireceived icontinuously ithe

ipolicy ilapses, iand ithere iis ia iprovision ito irevive ithe ipolicy iwithin ia istipulated

iperiod. iIf ithe ipremium iis ipaid ifor ithree ifull iyears ithe ipolicy iacquires ipaid iup

ivalue iand ithe isame iis ipayable iat ithe iend iof ithe icontract iperiod ior iit ican ibe

isurrendered. iOnce ithe ipolicy ibecomes ipaid iup iit iwill inot ibe ieligible ifor iany

ibonus ifrom ithe idate iof ilapse. iSuch ia iclause iin ithe iLife iInsurance ipolicy iis

iknown ias iforfeiture iclause. iThe iclause i4 iof iLife iInsurance iCorporation iof iIndia

iendowment ipolicy ireads70 iNon- iForfeiture iRegulations: iIf, iafter iat ileast ithree

iyears' ipremium ihave ibeen ipaid iin irespect iof ithis ipolicy iany isubsequent

ipremium ibe inot iduly ipaid, ithis ipolicy ishall inot ibe iwholly ivoid, ibut ishall

isubsist ias ia ipaid iup ipolicy ifor ia ireduced isum ipayable ion ithe iDate iof iMaturity

ior iat ithe iLife iAssured's iprior ideath iprovided ithe ipaid-up isum iassured iis inot

iless ithan iRs. i250/-. iThe ipolicy iso ireduced ishall ithereafter ibe ifree ifrom iall

iliability ifor ipayments iwithin ithe imentioned ipremium, ibut ishall inot ibe ientitled

ito iparticipate iin ifuture iprofits. iThe iexisting ibonus iadditions, iif iany, iwill iremain

iattached ito ithe ireduced ipaid iup ipolicy‖. iIn iHutchappa iv. iUnion iof iIndia71 ithe

iprayer ibefore ithe iHigh iCourt iwas ito ideclare iClause i4 iof iInsurance iPolicy ias

iunconstitutional iand iultravires. iIn ithis icase itwo iissues iwere iraised iwhether

iforfeiture iis iright? iand iwhether icalling ifor ifresh imedical iexamination iat ithe

itime iof irevival iis iin iorder?. iAs iper iterms iand iconditions iof ithe ipolicy iif

ipremium iis ipaid ifor iless ithan ithree iyears, ithe ipolicy idoes inot iacquire iany ipaid
iup ivalueand
the iamount ipaid iwill ibe iforfeited, iwhen ia ipolicy ilapses iand iif iit iis iintended ito

irevive ithe ipolicy i, iat ithe itime irevival iin isome icases imedical iexamination iis

icalled ifor. iIn ithe iinstant icase isuch ia irequirement iwas imade iby ifor irevival.

iSuch ia icondition iwas ichallenged ias iopposed ito ipublic iinterest iand ipublic

ipolicy iby ithe ipetitioner. iThe ilearned isingle ijudge iupheld ithe irequirement iof

imedical iexamination iand iobserved ithat iforfeiture iis iarbitrary iand iis iin iviolation

iof iArticle i14and21oftheConstitutionofIndia.TheLearnedjudgefurtherobservedthat

―whenthecontractisseizedasamatteroffairnesstoavoidunjustenrichmentto ithe

iadvantage iof ithe iinsurer iand ito ithe idisadvantage iof ithe iinsured iwithholding iof

isuch ipremium iamount ipaid iwould ibe idefinitely iagainst ithe iconstitutional

imandate

iasisenvisagedunderArticles38and39oftheConstitution‖.Theabovejudgment iwas

ichallenged ibefore ithe iDivision iBench iby ithe iInsurance iCorporation iand ithe

isame iwas iallowed isetting iaside ithe idirections iof iSingle iJudge ithe ipolicy

icondition iwasupheld.

Revival iof ilapsed ipolicy.

Life iInsurance iContract ibeing ia ilong iterm icontract ithere iis ia ipossibility ithat iin

ithe imiddle ifor isome ireasons ithe ipolicyholder imay inot ibe iable ito ipay ithe

ipremium iand iallow ithe ipolicy ito ilapse iwhereby ithe irisk icover iis ialso ilost. iTo

iavoid isuch ia icontingency ithe iinsurance icompanies iprovide ia iclause iin ithe

ipolicy ithat ithe ilapsed ipolicy ican ibe irevived ion icomplying iwith icertain

irequirements ilike ideclaration iof igood ihealth, ipayment iof ipremium ialong iwith

iinterest iand iin isome icases ialong iwith imedical ireport. iOn irevival ino inew

ipolicy idocument iis iissued, ithe iexisting iterms iand iconditions iof ithe ipolicy iare

igiven ilife iand ithe iparties iwill ibe ibound iby ithe isame. iIn icase iwhere iadverse

imedical iconditions ifound iin ithe ihealth ireport iat

ithetimeofrevivalthepremiumamountorthetermwillbereworkedbymutual
consent. iA isimple ireading iof ithe ipolicy icondition iwill ishow ithat ia ilapsed

ipolicy ican ibe irevived iduring ithe ilife itime iof ithe iassured. iRevival itakes ieffect

ionly iafter ithe isame iis iapproved iby ithe iinsurer iand iis ispecifically

icommunicated ito ithe ilife iassured.

The iquestion iof irevival iand ipayment iof iconsideration iof ipremium iwas

idiscussed iby ithe iSupreme icourt iin iLife iInsurance iCorporation iof iIndia iv. iJaya

iChandel i72 i. iThe iissue idiscussed iwas irevival iof ia ilapsed ipolicy iand iwhen iit

ican ibe isaid ito ibe icomplete. iIn ithis icase ithe iclaim iunder ithe ipolicy iwas

irepudiated ifor ithe ireason i ithat ion ithe idate iof ideath iof ithe iinsured ithe ipolicy

iwas iunder ilapsed icondition. iIt iwas ithe icontention iof ithe iclaimant ithat ithe

iconsideration ifor irevival iwas iissued iby iway iof icheque ibefore ithe ideath iof ithe

iinsured iand itherefore, ithe iinsurer icould inot ihave irepudiated ithe iclaim. iThe

istand iof ithe iinsurer iwas ithat ithe ipolicy ihad ilapsed idue ito inon-payment iof

ipremium iin itime iand ithe icheque iwas ireceived ion i12.07.1995 ilong iafter ithe

ideath iand ithis iitself iis isufficient ito ishow ithat ithe icheque iwas inot iissued iprior

ito ithe ideath iof ithe iinsured iand ithe icourt iaccepted ithe istand iof ithe iinsurer iand

iupheld ithe idecision. iThe ipoints ito ibe inoted ihere iare ithat ia iLife iInsurance

ipolicy ican ibe irevived ionly iduring ithe ilife itime iof ithe iAssured iand ithe iright ito

irevive ipolicy icontinues iwith ithe iinsurer iand ithe isame icannot ibe isought ias ia

imatter iof iright iby ithe ipolicyholder..

Suicide iclause:

This iis ivery iimportant iand imost iof ithe iinsurance icompanies ido inot icover ithe

irisk iif ithe ideath iis idue ito isuicide iwithin ione iyear ifrom ithe idate iof ipolicy.

iThere iare imore ithan ione idate iwhich ihave ito ibe iclosely istudied iwhen iwe

idiscuss ithe iSuicide iclause. iThey iare iDate iof iCommencement, iDate iof iPolicy

iand iDate iof iProposal.

iThereisaprovisioninLifeInsuranceindustrytodatebackcommencementdate
will ibe iallowed ifor ipayment iof iyearly, ihalf-yearly, ior iquarterly ipremiums iand

i15 idays ifor imonthly ipremiums. iIf ideath ioccurs iwithin ithis iperiod iand ibefore

ithe ipayment iof ithe ipremium ithen idue, ithe iPolicy iwill ibe ivalid iand ithe isum

iassured ipaid iafter ideduction iof ithe ipremium ias ialso ithe iunpaid ipremium/s

ifalling idue ibefore ithe inext ianniversary iof ithis iPolicy. iIf ipremium iis inot ipaid

ibefore ithe iexpiry iof ithe idays iof igrace ithe iPolicy ilapses." iThe iSupreme iCourt

iwhile iupholding ithe icondition iobserved ithat iif iall ithe iterms iand iconditions iof

ithe ipolicy i(contract ibetween ithe iparties) ihave ito ibe ikept iin imind iand igiven

ieffect ito, iacceptance iof iargument ion ibehalf iof ithe icomplainant iwould imake ithe

ilast ipart iof iCondition i2 iredundant, iotiose iand iinoperative; iand ia icourt iof ilaw

icannot iconstrue ia idocument iin ithe imanner isuggested iby ithe icounsel ifor ithe

icomplainant. iAs ithe ipremium iwas idue ion iApril i28, i1996 iand iwas inot ipaid itill

iMay i28, i1996, ithe ipolicy ilapsed. iHence inothing ibecomes ipayable iunder

ithepolicy.

Guaranteed iSurrender iValue:

There iis ia iprovision iin ithe iInsurance iAct iitself ifor isurrender iof ipolicy. iThe

imain isubstance iof ithis iSection iis ithat iif iall ipremiums ihave ibeen ipaid ifor iat

ileast ithree iconsecutive iyears iin ithe icase iof ia ipolicy iissued iby ian iinsurer, ior

ifive iyears iin ithe icase iof ia ipolicy iissued iby ia iprovident isociety idefined iin iPart

iIII, iacquires ia iguaranteed isurrender ivalue, ito iwhich ishall ibe iadded ithe

isurrender ivalue iof iany isubsisting ibonus ialready iattached ito ithe ipolicy. iFurther,

ia ipolicy iwhich ihas iacquired ia isurrender ivalue ishall inot ilapse iby ireason iof ithe

inon-payment iof ifurther ipremiums ibut ishall ibe ikept ialive ito ithe iextent iof ithe

ipaid-up isum iinsured. iA i ipolicy ikept ialive ito ithe iextent iof ithe ipaid-up isum

iinsured ishall inot ibe ientitled ito iparticipate iin iany iprofits ideclared idistributable

iafter ithe iconversion iof ithe ipolicy iinto ia ipaid-up ipolicy.

 CHAPTER-3

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
i
 RESEARCH iOBJECTIVES

 To istudy iof ithe ifinancial iperformance iofPolicybazaar.com.

 To istudy ithe iterm iand ihealth iinsurance iprovided ibyPolicyBazaar.com.

 To istudy ithe iconsumer ipreference itowards iproduct iofPolicybazaar.com.

 To know the motivating factors of consumers in purchasing products of

iPolicybazaar.com.

 The iother iobjective iis ito iknow iabout ithe icustomer isatisfaction ilevel iassociated iwith

ithe iproduct.

 To istudy imarketing istrategies iofPolicybazaar.com.

 CHAPTER-4

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
i
 RESEARCH iMETHODOLOGY

The iprocess iused i i i i ito i i i i i icollect iinformation i i i i i iand idata i i i i i ifor i i i i i ithe i i i i i

ipurpose i i i iof imaking ibusinessdecisions.

The imethodology imay iinclude ipublication iresearch, iinterviews, isurveys iand iother

iresearch itechniques, iand icould iinclude iboth ipresent iand ihistorical iinformation. iThe

iresearch iis imany itypes isuch ias idescriptive iresearch i,Analytical iresearch, i

iFundamental iresearch, iConceptual iresearch i, iEmpiricalresearch.

This iresearch iis ibased ion idescriptive iresearch ito icomplete ithis istudy iprimary ias

iwell ias isecondary isource iof iinformation iis iused. iTo istudy ithe iconsumer iattitude i&

ibrand ipreferences iof iedible ioils, iprimary idata iis icollected iby iusing ia idetailed

istructured iquestionnaire iwhich iwas iadministered ito ia isampling imethod. iThe istudy

ihas ibeen icarried iout iin iNoida icity. iThe isecondary idata iis icollected ifrom ipublished

ithesis, ireputed ijournals, imagazines iand irelated iwebsites. iThe idata iso icollected iis

iscrutinized, itabulated, ianalyzed iand ifinally iused ifor ithe istudypurpose.

Research idesign

Descriptive iresearch, ialso iknown ias istatistical iresearch, idescribes idata iand

icharacteristics iabout ithe ipopulation ior iphenomenon ibeing istudied. iDescriptive

iresearch ianswers ithe iquestions iwho i, iwhat i, iwhere, iwhen iand ihow.

Although ithe idata idescription iis ifactual, iaccurate iand isystematic, ithe iresearch

icannot idescribe iwhat icaused ia isituation. iThus, idescriptive iresearch icannot ibe iused

ito icreate ia icausal irelationship, iwhere ione ivariable ieffects ianother. iIn iother iwords,

idescriptive iresearch ican ibe isaid ito ihave ia ilow irequirement ifor iinternal ivalidity.

Descriptive iresearch idesign iwill ibe iadopted ifor ithis istudy.

A iframework ior iblueprint ifor iconducting ithe iresearch iproject. iIt ispecifies ithe

idetails iof ithe iprocedures inecessary ifor iobtaining ithe iinformation ineeded ito

istructure iand/or isolve iresearch iproblems. iA igood iresearch idesign ilays ithe

ifoundation ifor iconducting ithe iproject. iA igood iresearch idesign iwill iensure ithat ithe

iresearch iproject iis iconducted ieffectively iand iefficiently. iTypically, ia iresearch

idesign iinvolves ithe ifollowing icomponents, iortasks:

 Define ithe iinformationneeded.

 Design ithe iresearch.

 Specify ithe imeasurement iand iscalingprocedures.

 Construct iand ipresent ia iquestionnaire ior ian iappropriate iform ifor idata

icollection.

 Specify ithe isampling iprocess iand isamplingsize.

 Develop ia iplan iof idata ianalysis.

SAMPLING iDESIGN

The ifollowing ifactors ihave ibeen idecided iwithin ithe iscope iof isample idesign:

iUNIVERSE iOF iSTUDY:Universe iof ithe istudy imeans iall ithe ipersons iwho iare ithe

icustomers iof iPolicybazaar.com iin iNoida.

 Theoretical: iIt icovered iall ithe iindividuals iwho iare ithe icustomers iof

iPolicybazaar.com iinNoida.

 Accessible: iIt icovered iall ithe iindividuals iwho iare ithe icustomers iof

iPolicybazaar.com iin iNoida iwho iare iwithin iour ireach. iIn ithis istudy iaccessible

ipopulation iwas icustomers iPolicybazaar.com iinNoida.

SAMPLE iSIZE: iA isample iof iminimum irespondents iwas iselected ifrom ivarious

iareas iof iNoida. iAn ieffort iwas imade ito iselect irespondents ievenly. iThe isurvey iwas

icarried iout ion i50respondents.

SAMPLE iUNIT: iIn ithis iproject isampling iunit iconsisted iof ithe ivarious iindividuals

iwho ihad ipurchaser iproduct iat iPolicybazaar.com iin iNoida.

SAMPLING iTECHNIQUE: iFor ithe ipurpose iof iresearch iconvenient isampling

itechnique iwas iused.

SAMPLING iFRAME: iIt iconsisted iof ivarious isources ifrom iwhere iinformation

iabout ithe irespondent iis iextracted. iMainly ipersonal ilinks iand iemployees iof
Personal iInteraction Telephonic iInteraction
iPolicybazaar.com iin iNoida iare iused ifor igetting iinformation iabout ithe

irespondents.

DATA iCOLLECTION iSOURCE: iTwo imethods ihave ibeen iused ito icollect ithe

irelevant idata, iwhich iare iessential ifor ithe istudy, ithey iare:

Primary iData: idata iis icollected ito iobtain idesired iinformation ithrough istructured

iquestionnaire.

Secondary iData: iit iis icompiled ithrough ibooks, imagazines, inewspapers iand iinternet

ietc… 48% 52%

 CHAPTER-5

FINDING,ANALYSIS
iANDINTERPRETATIO
NS 28% 36% 16% 20%
 NO. iOF iRESPONNDENT
DATA iANALYSIS iAND iINTERPRETATION
Q1) iwhat itype iof iapproach idid iI iprefer?

FACTOR NO. iOF iRESPONNDENT (%

iOFRESPONDENTS)

Personal iInteraction 26 52%

Telephonic iInteraction 24 48%

Total 50 100%

INTERPRETATION
52% imost iof ithe ipeople iprefer ipersonal iinteraction, i48% iprefer ito itake
itelephonic iinteraction ias ishown iin iabove ipie ichart.
 NO. iOF iRESPONDENT
VerygoodGoodAverageBad
Q2) iHow ido irate ithe isale iand imarketing ipractices i54%
30% 16%
of ithe icompany?

FACTOR NO. iOF (% iOF

iRESPONDENT iRESPONDENT

)
Very igood 8 16%

Good 10 20%

Average 18 36%

Bad 14 28%

Total 50 100%

INTERPRETATION
About i16%of ithe ipeople iresponse iwas ivery igood iwhile ipresenting

iPolicybazaar.com iinsuranceproduct iand i20% iwas igood iand i36% iwas iaverage

iwhile imost iof ithat iis i28% iwas ibad.

Q3)Which imethod ido iI iprefer ito iinteract iwith ipeople?
Factors No. iof iRespondents (% iof iRespondents)
Direct 19 38%

Indirect 22 44.44%

Third iparty 9 18%

Total 50 100%

No. iof iRespondents

DirectIndirectThird iparty

18%
NewspaperTelevision
44% 12% Friends/
14% 30% iFamily Others
38%

44%
INTERPRETATION
During ifeedback iand isurvey iof iPolicybazaar.com iInsurance icompany iLtd.
iCustomer/ irespondents iprefer ito igive itheir iviews iand ifeedback imost iprobably

ithrough iindirect iway i(telephonic iinteraction) ialmost i44% iof ipeople icovered

ithrough itelephonic iconversation iand i38% ithrough idirect iinteraction iand iother

ithrough ihelp iof iexisting icustomer, irelatives iand iparents.

Q4) iAre iyou isatisfied iby ithe iservice iprovided iby ithe iPolicybazaar.com
iinsurance icompany?

Factors No iof irespondents (% iof irespondents)

Satisfied 27 54%

Very imuch isatisfied 15 30%

Not isatisfied 8 16%

Total 50 100%

INTERPRETATION No iof irespondents

The istudy ireveals ithat ifromPolicybazaar.com iInsurance
0% 28% iproducts i54% iof ithe
SatisfiedVerymuchsatisfiedNotsatisfied
56% 16%
irespondents iare isatisfied i& i30% iare ivery imuch isatisfied& i16% iof ithe irespondents

iare inot isatisfied ifrom itheir iservices iprovided.

 No74%
iofrespondents
8% 14% 4%
Q5) iHow idid iyou icome ito iknow iabout ithe iinsurance ipolicies?

Factors No iof irespondents (% iof irespondents)

Newspaper 7 14%
Television 15 30%

Friends/ iFamily 22 44%

Others 6 12%

Total 50 100%

INTERPRETATION
About i44% icustomer irespondent ithat ithey iwill iknow iabout ithe iPolicybazaar.com
iinsurance ithrough ifriends/family iand i30% iknow ithrough itelevision ior i14% ithrough

inewspaper, i12% iknow ithrough iothers.

Factors No iof irespondents (% iof irespondents)
Monthly 8 16%

Half iyearly 14 28%

Quarterly 0 0%
Yearly 28 56%
Total 50 100%

INTERPRETATTION
No iof irespondents
MonthlyHalfyearlyQuarterlyYearly
About i56% iof ithe icustomer
60,000-1,50,000 iwill
30%ipay ion ithe iyearly
1,50,000-2,50,000
6% 40%24%ibases ior i28%5,00,000
2,50,000-5,00,000 ipay ioniabove
ihalf

iyearly ibases iand i16% ihave ipay ion imonthly ibases.

Factor No iof irespondents (% iof irespondents)
Risk icover 4 8%
Tax isaving 7 14%
Investment 2 4%
All iof ithem 37 74%
Total 50 100%

INTERPRETATION No iof irespondents

Through ithe isurvey iI ifound ithat iPolicybazaar.com iopinion ithrough ithe
RiskcoverTaxsavingInvestmentAll iofthem
icustomer iis iimportant ibecause iof iall iof ithem ii.e74% icustomer isay ibecause iof
i(tax isaving, iinvestment, irisk icover) iand i14% icustomer isay ithat ibecause iof itax
isaving ior i8% ibecause iof irisk icover iand i4% ibecause iof iinvestment.

Health iinsurance
0% iplan18% Endowment
68%
14%iplan ULIPs Others
Factors No iof irespondents (% iof irespondents)
60,000-1,50,000 12 24%
1,50,000-2,50,000 20 40%
2,50,000-5,00,000 15 30%
5,00,000 iabove 3 6%
Total 50 100%

No iofrespondents

INTERPRETATION
During ithe isurvey imost iof ithe icustomer ihaving ithe isum iassured ibetween i1.5 ilakh ito
2.5 lakh i(40%) iand i30% iof ithe icustomer ihaving isum iassured ibetween i2.5 ilakh
ito5 ilakh ior i20% iof ithe icustomer ihaving isum iassured ibetween i60 ithousand ito
i1.5lakh.
 No iofrespondents
Q10) iwhich ischeme iof iinsurance ipolicy ihave iyou itaken?
Good ireturn Tax ibenefit Other/both
Factors No iof irespondents (% iof irespondents)
Health iinsurance iplan 7 14%
Endowment iplan 34 68%
ULIPs 0 0%
Others 9 18%
Total 50 100%

INTERPRETATION
About i68% icustomer ihave iendowment iplan iin iPolicybazaar.com ior i14% ihaving
ihealth iinsurance iplan iand i18% ihaving iother iinsurance iplan iin
74% 18% 8%
iPolicybazaar.com.
Q13)If iyou ibuy ia inew ipolicy iwould iyou ilike ito igo ifor iPolicybazaar.com iinsurance?

Factors No iof irespondents (% iof irespondents)

Yes 43 86%
No 7 14%
Total 50 100%

No iof irespondents
YesNo

14%

86%

INTERPRETATION
In ithe isurvey iI ifound ithat iabout i86% iof ithe icustomer iwill ibuy i(repurchase) inew
iinsurance ipolicy ifrom iPolicybazaar.com iand i14% iwill inot iinterested ito irepurchase

ithe iPolicybazaar.com iproduct.

 No iofrespondents
Q14) iWhat iwould iyou ilike imore iin iinsurance ipolicies iog iPolicybazaar.com
iof iIndia?

Factors No iof irespondents (% iof irespondents)

Good ireturn 9 18.%
Tax ibenefit 4 8%
Other/both 37 74%
Total 50 100%

INTERPRETATION
Above ipie ichart ishow ithat iabout i74% iof icustomer isay ithat iinsurance ipolicy
iwill iprovide iboth igood ireturn ior itax ibenefit iand i(other ibenefit) iand i18% isay

ithat ionly igood ireturn ior i8% isay ithat ionly iTax ibenefit..
 Section iB
1. SIZE
(A) TOTALPREMIUM
(Rs. iIn icrores)
FY i13-14 FY i14-15 FY i15-16 FY i16-17 FY i17-18

LIC 63533 75127 90792 127822 149789

Private 3120 7727 15083 28253 51561

iInsurer
s
TOTAL 66653 82854 105875 156075 201350

Avg. Rank points points iafter

Premium imultiplying
( iIn iCrores) iby iweightage
i(5%)

LIC 101412.20 1 1 5

Private 21148.80 2 0.5 2.5

Insurance
iCo.

Average ipremium iof iLICis imuch imore ithan ithat iof iall iinsurance icompanies
ialtogether. iLICs iaverage ipremium iof ithe ilast ifive iyears iis inearly ifive itimes ithe

iaverage ipremium iof ithe iall iother iprivate iinsurance icompanies.

It ican ibe isaid ithat iup ito ithat itime ithere iwere iless inumber iof iprivate iplayers iin ithe
ifield iof iinsurance ibut ithen ialso iundoubtedly iLIC iis ithe iking.
(B) TOTALINCOME

(Rs. iIn icrores)

FY i13-14 FY i14-15 FY i15-16 FY i16-17 FY i17-18

LIC 93089 112393 132147 174425 206363

Private 4323 9049 18863 24242 52648

iInsurer
s
TOTAL 97412 121442 151010 198667 259011
Avg. Rank points points iafter
iIncome imultiplying
i( iIn iby iweightage
i(5%)
iCrores)

LIC 143683.40 1 1 5

Private 21825.00 2 0.5 2.5

Insuranc
i

e
Co.

All iover iincome iof iLIC iis imuch imore ithan iof iprivate iplayers. iIt iis idue ito ithe ifact
ithat iLIC ibeing ia igovernment iagency iis ibeing itrusted iby ilot iof icompanies iand ihas

ilarge inumber iof ishares iin ibig icorporate.

(C) SIZE iOF iBALANCESHEET

(Rs. iIn icrores)

FY i13-14 FY i14-15 FY i15-16 FY i16-17 FY i17-18

LIC 346022 416910 531390 625956 776904

Private 6585 13653 28910 53048 100774

iInsurer
s
TOTAL 352607 430563 560300 679004 877678

Avg. Rank points points iafter

iBalance imultiplying
iSheet iby iweightage
Size i(5%)
( iIn iCrores)
LIC 539436.40 1 1 5

40594.00 2 0.5 2.75

Private
Insurance
i

co.
i

Total iaverage isize iof ibalance isheet iof iLIC iin ithe ilast ifive iyears iis icertainly ihigher i
ithan ithat iof iprivate iinsurance icompanies. iThere iis ia ihuge igap iin ithis ivalue. iIt iis

iobvious ithat iLIC ihas ibigger ibalance isheet ias ibeing iworking iin ithe iinsurance ifield

ifor iquite ilarge itime. iAs icompared ito iaverage ibalance isheet isize iof i40,594 icrores

iof iprivate iinsurance icompanies, iLICs iaverage ibalance isheet isize igoes ito imuch

ihigh ias ithat iof i5,39,436.4crores.

(D) TOTAL iNUMBER iOFPOLICIES

FY i13-14 FY i14-15 FY i15-16 FY i16-17 FY i17-18

LIC 26968069 23978123 31590515 38229292 37612599

Private 1658847 2233075 3871410 7922294 13261558

iInsurer
s
TOTAL 28626916 26211198 35462117 46151586 50874157

Avg. Rank Points points iafter

inumber iof imultiplying
policies iby iweightage
i(5%)

LIC 31675670 1 1 5

Private 5789437 2 0.5 2.5

Insurance
Co.
i

LIC iis ian iundoubted ileader iin ithe ifield iof iaverage inumber iof ipolicies iper iyear iin
ithe ilast ifive iyears. iIt iis iseen ithat iprivate iinsurance icompanies iare igaining

imomentum iand iare itrying ito idefeat iLIC iin icase iof inew iinsurances. iMain ireason

ibehind iLIC ihaving isuch ia ilarge inumber iof ipolicies iis ithe itrust iof ia icommon iman.

iLICbeing ia igovernment iagency ihas igot ia ifaith iof iIndian imass. iPeople iare inot iyet

iprepared ito igive itheir isavings iin ithe ihands iof iprivate iplayers.
(E) NUMBER iOFBRANCHES

FY i13-14 FY i14-15 FY i15-16 FY i16-17 FY i17-18

LIC 2196 2197 2220 2301 2522

Private 416 804 1645 3072 6391

iInsurer
s
TOTAL 2612 3001 3865 5373 8913

%growth Rank points points iafter

iin inumber imultiplying
iof iby iweightage
i(5%)
ibranches

LIC 14.8 2 0.5 2.5

Private 1436 1 1 5

Insuranc
i

e
Co.

When ithe imatter iof itotal inumber iof ibranches icomes iits ivery imuch iobvious ithat
iLIC, ibeing ithe ioldest iexisting iinsurance icompany iin iIndia, ihas ithe ilarge inumber

iof ioffices iin ithe icountry iby iany isingle iinsurance icompany. iSince ithe inumber iof

iprivate iinsurance icompanies iis iincreasing, iwith icontinuous iexpansion iin itheir

ibusiness, inow ithe inumber iof ibranches iof iall iprivate iplayers ihas icrossed ithe

inumber iof ibranches iof iLIC.

2. GROWTH
 (A) iFIRSTPREMIUM

(Rs. iIn icrores)

FY i13-14 FY i14-15 FY i15-16 FY i16-17 FY i17-18

LIC 17347 20653 28515 55934 59996

Private 2440 5564 10270 19425 33715

iInsurer
s
TOTAL 19787 26217 38785 75359 93711

Growth iin Growth iin Rank points points

iFirst iFirst iafter
iPremium iPremium imultiplyin
i(in i(in g iby
iPercentag iAbsoute iweightage
e iTerms) iTerms) i(in i(10%)
icrores)
LIC 245.85 42649 2 0.5 5

Private 1281.76 31275 1 1 10

Insuranc
i

e
Co.
Though iLIC ihas iattained imore igrowth iin iabsolute iterms ii.e. iRs.42649 icrores ibut
iprivate iplayers ibeing iso iless iin inumber ifive iyears iback ihas iachieved ia idream

icome itrue igrowth iof i1281.76 i% iwhich iis icertainly ia imatter iof ipride ifor ithem.
(B) iGROWTH iIN iINCOME

(Rs. iIn icrores)

FY i13-14 FY i14-15 FY i15-16 FY i16-17 FY i17-18
LIC 12101 19303 19754 42277 31988

Private 2692 4725 9814 5379 28406

iInsurer
s
TOTAL 14793 24028 29568 47656 60394
% iGROWTH iIN iINCOME i:
FY i13-14 FY i14-15 FY i15-16 FY i16-17 FY i17-18

LIC 14.9 20.7 17.5 32 18.3

Private 165 109.3 108.4 28.5 117

iInsurer
s
TOTAL 17.8 24.6 24.3 31.5 30.3

Growth iin Growth iin Rank points points

iIncome iIncome i iafter
i(in i(in imultiplyin
iPercentag iAbsoute g iby
e iTerms) iTerms) iweightage
i(in icrores) i(10%)

LIC 164.34 19887 2 0.5 5

Private 955.20 25714 1 1 10

Insurance
Co.
i

Here iLIC ihas ineither iattained imore igrowth iin iabsolute iterms ii.e. iRs.19887 icrores
ias icompared ito i25714 icrores iof iprivate iplayers inor ihas igot imore igrowth iin iterms

iof ipercentage. iThis ishows ithat iprivate iplayers iare idoing igreat ijob iin ienhancing

itheir ibusiness.
3. PRODUCTIVITY

(A) BUSINESS iPERBRANCH

(Rs. iIn icrores)

FY i13-14 FY i14-15 FY i15-16 FY i16-17 FY
i17-
18
LIC 28.93 34.20 40.9 55.55 59.20

Private 7.5 9.61 9.17 9.2 8.07

iInsurer
s

Avg. Rank points points iafter

iBusiness iPer imultiplying
iBranch i(In iby iweightage
i(5%)
crores)

LIC 43.756 1 1 5

8.71 2 0.5 2.5

Private
iInsuranc
e iCo.

Avg ibusiness iper ibranch iof iLIC iis imuch ihigher ithan ithat iof iwhole iprivate
iinsurance icompanies.
(B) INCOME iPERBRANCH

(Rs. iIn icrores)

FY i13-14 FY i14-15 FY i15-16 FY i16-17 FY i17-18

LIC 42.39 51.16 59.52 75.80 81.80

Private 10.41 11.25 11.47 7.89 8.23

iInsurer
s

Avg. Rank points points iafter

iIncome iPer imultiplying iby
Branch iweightage
i(5%)
i(In
icrores)
LIC 62.134 1 1 5

Private 9.864 2 0.5 2.5

Insurance
Co.
i

Average iincome iper ibranch iof iLIC iis imuch imore ithan ithat iof iprivate iinsurance
icompanies. iIts ialmost isix itimes ithe itotal ivalue iof iall ithe iprivate icompanies.
4. GRIEVANCEHANDLING
TOTAL iNUMBER iOF iGRIEVANCES
FY i13-14 FY i14-15 FY i15-16 FY i16-17 FY i17-18

LIC 474 704 851 354 651

Private 45 195 540 507 1406

iInsurer
s
NUMBER iOF iGRIEVANCES iRESOLVED

FY i13-14 FY i14-15 FY i15-16 FY i16-17 FY i17-18

LIC 39 123 215 313 80

Private 26 83 216 450 1103

iInsurer
s
% iOF iGRIEVANCES iRESOLVED

FY i13-14 FY i14-15 FY i15-16 FY i16-17 FY i17-18

LIC 8.2 17.5 25.3 88.4 12.2

Private 57.7 42.6 40.0 88.7 78.4

iInsurer
s
% Rank points points iafter
iGrievances imultiplying
iresolved iby iweightage
i(5%)

LIC 25.37 2 0.5 2.5

Private 69.70 1 1 5

Insurance
Co.
i
Grievance iHandling iis ione iof ithe imajor iissues iin iany iorganization. iIt iplays ian
iimportant irole iin iInsurance isector. iPeople ido iattract itowards icompanies iwho

ihandles itheir igrievances. iHere iwe isee ithat iprivate iplayers iare imuch iahead iof iLIC

iwhen ithe imatter icomes ito igrievance imanagement. iIn ithe ilast ifive iyears iLIC ihas

iresolvedonly

25.37 i% iof icases ibrought iin ifront iof ithem iwhile ithe ipercentage iof icases iresolved
iin icase iof iprivate iplayers iis i69.7 i%. iThis ishows ithat iprivate iplayers iare ivery

iserious iabout itheir iimage iand iare iworking ihard ito iprovide ithe isolution iof ithe

iproblems iof ithe ipeople ias iearly ias ipossible.

PROBLEMS AND LIMITATIONS
i i
 LIMITATIONS
The ilimitations ifaced iduring ithe iresearch iand iafter ithe idata icollection iwere

1) Time iconstraint- isince ithe itime ispan ifor ithe ithesis iwas ionly ithree imonths

ian iin idepth istudy iand ianalysis ibecame ia ilittledifficult.

2) Sample isize- ithe isample isize iof ithe istudy iis ionly i50 iwhich ido inot igive ia

icomprehensive iresult. iThe iconclusion iof ithe istudy imay inot ihave iresulted ito

ian iaccurate ioutcome idue ito ithe isample isize ibeingsmall.

3) Bound ito ionly iNoida- ithe iother ilimitation iof ithe istudy iwas iit iwas ilimited ito

ionly ithe iNoida iwhich iconstitutes iof ia idifferent iset iof isamples. iThe ibuying

ibehavior iof ian iindividual ivaries ifrom iplace itoplace.

4) Questions ileft iblank- icertain iquestion ihave ibeen ileft iblank iwhich idoes inot

iallow ian iaccurateanalysis.

5) Biasness- iamong ithe i50 irespondents ifew iof ithem iwere ibrand iloyal iand ifew

iof ithem iwere ithe iones iwho ihad istill istuck ito itheir itraditional ijewelers

ihence ito ian iextent ithere iwas ibiasness iinvolved iin ithestudy.

6) Useful iFinancial iinsights iare inot ieasilyavailable.

7) Due ito itime iconstraint isufficient iresearch ion iall ithe iinvestment itools iis

idifficult.

8) The isurvey isample iis inot ivery ilarge iforanalysis.

9) Properly iconvincing ipeople ito iinvest iin iinsurance iproducts iischallenging.

10) Due ito irecession ithere iis iliquidity icrunch iin ithemarket.

11)11)
FINDINGS
 FINDINGS

From ithe iabove ianalysis iof iPolicybazaar.com iInsurance iI ifound ithat

1) 52% iof ithe icustomer iprefer ipersonal iinteraction, i48% iprefer ito itake itelephonic

iinteraction iwhere ithere iare ifew iwhich iare itotally iignore ito iinteract ito iany ipolicy

iagent iof ia iprivatecompany.

2) Few ipeople isaid ithey iare inot isatisfied iby ipolicy ibenefit iand ireturn igiven iby

iPolicybazaar.com.

3) Many iof ithem ilike iPolicybazaar.com ibecause iof iits ipremium iand irisk irecover iage

ischeme.

4) The istudy ireveals ithat ithe iPolicybazaar.com iinsurance iproduct i54% iof ithe

irespondents iare isatisfied i& i30% iare ivery imuch isatisfied iof itherespondents

5) It iis ifound ithat iof ithe ipeople iprefer idirect iinteraction. iThey iwant ito iknow imore

iabout itheir iproduct ias ithey idoesn‘t ihave ibrief iknowledge iabout ithe iproduct iand

ibenefits igiven ibythem.

 LIC iis ithe igiant iof ithe iinsurance isector. iThe ioverall isize iof iLIC iis imuch imore

ithan ithat iof iall iprivate iinsurance icompanies. iPrivate iinsurers iare iin iexpansion

imode iand i iare iincreasing itheir isize ibut iare istill imuch ibehind iLIC. iTotal ipremium

ideposits iin iLIC iare imuch ihigher ithan ithe iprivate iinsurance icompanies. iTotal

ipremium iof iLIC iin iFY i17-18 iwas i149789 icrores iwhich ithree itimes imore ithan ithat

iof iprivate iinsurance icompanies.

 Income iof iLIC iis imuch igreater ithan iprivate iinsurance icompanies. iLast iyear itotal

iincome ifrom iinvestments iof iLIC iwas i48244.14 icrores iwhich iwas inearly iequal ito

ithe itotal iincome iof ithe iall iprivate iinsurance icompanies. iBy ithis iwe ican iimagine

ihow ibig ithe iLICis.

 Size iof ibalance isheet iof iprivate iinsurance icompanies iare ilagging imuch ibehind

iLIC. iBalance isheet iof iLIC iis iseven itimes ibigger ithan ithat iof iprivate

iinsurancecompanies.

 If iwe isee ithe itotal inumber iof ipolicies iissued iby iLIC iand iprivate iinsurance

icompanies, iwe ifind ithat ithere iis ia ihuge igap ibetween ithem. iNo idoubt ithat iLIC iis ia

iwell iestablished iplayer iin ithe ifield iof iinsurance iand imany iprivate icompanies ihave

ijust istarted itheir ibusiness. iHence iit iis iobvious ithat iLIC iis ihaving ilarge inumber iof

ipolicyholders.

 Number iof ibranches iof iprivate iinsurance icompanies iis iincreasing ias ithe inew

iplayers iare ientering iin ithis imarket. iAlso ithe iestablished iplayers iare iin iexpansion

iphase iand ihence iare iexpanding itheir ibusiness. iThere iare imany iprivate iinsurance

icompanies iand ihence ithere itotal inumber iof ibranches ihas igone ipast iLIC iin ithe ilast

ifinancial iyear. iBut ioffices iof iprivate iinsurance icompanies iare imostly iin iurban

iareas iand istill iit iis iLICwhich icovers imost iof ithearea.

Hence iwe isee ithat iLIC iis ileading iwhen iit icomes ito isize. iIt iis igiant iin iinsurance

isector ihaving ihuge inetwork iand icustomer ibase.

 We isee ithat idue ito iexcellent iservice iquality iand iattractive ioffers iprivate

iinsurance icompanies ihave istarted igetting ia inumber iof icustomers. iThey iare

igrowing irapidly. iThough iLIC iis ialso iincreasing iits icustomer ibase ibut iprivate

iinsurance icompanies iare imoving iat ia ifastpace.

 Though ithe iincome iof iprivate iinsurance icompanies iis inegligible iwhen icompared

iwith iLIC ibut ithen ialso ithe ipace iwith iwhich ithey iare iincreasing itheir iincome iis

itremendous. iPrivate iinsurance icompanies iare iexpanding itheir ibusiness iand iwill

icertainly igoing ito igive ia itough icompetition ito iLIC iin ithe icomingdays.

 LIC iis icertainly ihaving ia ilarge icustomer ibase. iPrivate iinsurance icompanies iare

inot ihaving ithat imuch inumber iof icustomer ibase ibut ithey iare iincreasing iit irapidly.

iThey ihave iregistered ia idecent igrowth iof i104.64 i% iin inumber iof inew ipolicies iin

ithe iyear i2016-17. iLast iyear ialso itheir igrowth irate iwas i67.4%.

 LIC, ibeing ithe ioldest iplayer iin ithe iexisting iinsurance imarket, ihas ithe ibiggest

imarket ishare iof i73.9 i% iwhich iwas i87.3% ifive iyears iearlier. iWe isee ithat iprivate

iinsurance icompanies iare ipenetrating iin ithe icustomer ibase iofLIC.

Overall iwe ican isee ithat iprivate iinsurance icompanies iare igiving ia itough

icompetition ito ithe iLIC iand iwill icertainly icreate ia igood ibusiness ifor ithemselves iin

ithe icoming idays.

 There iare imany inew ientrants iin ithis isector. iThere iare imany iprivate iinsurance

icompanies iwho ihave ireported iloss iin ithis iand iprevious iyears. iThis iis ithe imain

ireason iwhy iprivate iinsurance icompanies ilag ibehind iLIC iin icase iof ibusiness iper i

ibranch. iThere iis ia ibig idifference ibetweenthem.

 Same iis ithe icase iwhen iit icomes ito iincome iper ibranch. iLIC iis imuch iahead iof

iprivate iinsurance icompanies iin ithis ifield. iThey iare iundoubted ichampions iin

iinsurance iwhen iit icomes ito iprofitearning.

RECOMMENDATIONS
 RECOMMENDATIONS
The isuggestions iare ibased ion ianalysis iand iobservation iduring ithe ifield istudy-

 Due ito iintense icompetition iin ithe iinsurance imarket, iPolicybazaar.com ihas ito iadopt

ibetter istrategies ito iattract imorecustomers.

 Return ion iinvestment, icompany ireputation iand ipremium ioutflow iare imost ipreferred

iattributes ithat iare iexpected iby ithe irespondents. iHence igreater ifocus ishould ibe

igiven ito ithese iattributes.

 Insurance iproducts iare itaken imainly iby imiddle iand ihigher iincome igroup. iHence

ithey ishould ibe iregarded ias imain itargeted iincome igroups. iInsurance iproducts iwhich

iare isuitable ifor ilower iincome igroup ishould ialso ibe ireleased iso ithat ithe imarket

ishare iincreases.

 Policybazaar.com ishould iadopt ieffective ipromotional istrategies ito iincrease ithe

iawareness ilevel iamong ithe iconsumers iand ito iwin itheirtrust.

 Policybazaar.com ishould iask ifor itheir iconsumer‘s ifeedback ito iknow iwhether ithe

iconsumers iare ireally isatisfied iof idissatisfied iwith ithe iservice iand iproduct ioffered

iby ithem. iIf ithey iare idissatisfied, ithen ithe ireasons ifor idissatisfaction ishould ibe

ifound iout iand icorrected iinfuture.

CONCLUSIONS
 CONCLUSION
Policybazaar.com iunder iwhich iI igained ia isignificant iknowledge iwith irespect ito

iTerm iand iLife iinsurance, iits iimportance iand iapplicability ias iwell ias iundertook ithe

itask ito irecruit iinsurance iadvisors iwhich iis iconductive ifor ithe icompany ito igrow

iwith imore iprosperity iwhat iI itaught iin ithe imanagement iinstitute iutilized ithem

ifruitfully ileading ito ithe ibest iadvantages ito ithe icompany iand ito ithe ibest iexperience

ifor imine. iAt ifar iI ican iconclude ithat ithe iLife iinsurance iis inoble iservice iwhich iis

ivery iimportant ifor ievery icitizen ito ilean iand irealize iits iimportance ibecause ithis ithe

ionly isource iwhich iremain ithe istatus iwhere ione iis iwith ithe ifamily ibread iearner iand

iwhenever ihe iis inot. iWith ithe igrowing ifinancial isector iI iwould ilike ito ichoose ithis

iindustry ifor imy ifuture icareer iadvancement iand ias ian iopportunity ito iservice

ithisindustry.

A iwell-functioning iinsurance imarket iplays ian iimportant irole iin ieconomic

idevelopment iand ifinancial istability iof ideveloping ieconomies isuch ias iIndia‘s. iFirst,

iit iinculcates iand iencourages ithe ihabit iof isaving. iSecond, iit iprovides ia isafety inet ito

irural iand iurban ienterprise iand iproductiveindividuals.

The ilife iinsurance imarket iin iIndia iis ion ia igrowth ipath. iIn ispite iof ithis, ithe icountry

i ilags ifar ibehind ithe iothers iin iawareness iabout ilife iinsurance. iThe ichallenge iis ito

ispread iawareness iabout ilife iinsurance iand iit itrue ibenefits. iThe iindustry ihas ito

iconvince ipeople ito ipark itheir ihard iearned imoney iin ilong-term iinsurance iand inot

ijust ilook iat iit ias ia itax isavinginstrument.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
 BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. PHILIPKOTLER(2001)‗MarketingManagement‘,PrenticeHall
iPvt.Ltd., iNew iDelhi, iMillenniumedition.

2. KOTHARIC.R.(1999)‗ResearchMethodology‘,WishwaPrakashan,
nd
iNew iDelhi, i2 edition.

3. LEON iG. iSCHFFMAN iand iLESLIE iLAZAR iKANUK(2007)

‗Consumer iBehavior‘, iPrentice iHall iPvt.Ltd., iNew iDelhi, i9th iedition.

WEBSITES:

• www.google.com
• www.economictimes.com
•
• https://www.policygenius.com

NEWSPAPER:

 Times iofIndia
 Economic itimes
ANNEXURE
 QUESTIONNAIRES
Q1) iwhat itype iof iapproach idid iI iprefer?

 PersonalInteraction

 Telephonic iInteraction

Q2) iHow ido irate ithe isale iand imarketing ipractices iof ithe iPolicybazaar.com?

 Verygood

 Good

 Average

 Bad

Q3)Which imethod ido iI iprefer ito iinteract iwith ipeople?

 Direct

 Indirect

 Third iparty

Q4) iAre iyou isatisfied iby ithe iservice iprovided iby ithe iPolicybazaar.com?

 Satisfied

 Very imuchsatisfied

 Notsatisfied

Q5) iHow idid iyou icome ito iknow iabout ithe iinsurance ipolicies?

 Newspaper

 Television

 Friends/ iFamily

 Others
Q6) iWhich icompany ipolicy ido iyou ihave?

 LIC

 ICICI

 HDFC

 Others

Q7) iWhat iis iperiodicity iof ipremium?

 Monthly

 Halfyearly

 Quarterly

 Yearly

Q8)Policybazaar.com iin iyour iopinion iis iimportant ibecause?

 Riskcover

 Taxsaving

 Investment

 All iofthem

Q9) iwhat iis ia isum iassured i(RS) iof iyour ipremium?

 60,000-1,50,000

 1,50,000-2,50,000

 2,50,000-5,00,000

 5,00,000 iabove

Q10) iwhich ischeme iof iinsurance ipolicy ihave iyou itaken?

 Health iinsurance iplan

 TermPlan

 ULIPs

 Others
Q11) iAre iyou ia icustomer iof iPolicybazaar.com?

 Yes

 No

Q12) iwhether iyou iare iaware iof iall idetail iof iPolicybazaar.com?

 Yes

 No

Q13)If iyou ibuy ia inew ipolicy iwould iyou ilike ito igo ifor iPolicybazaar.com?

 Yes

 No

Q14) iWhat iwould iyou ilike imore iin iinsurance ipolicies iof iPolicybazaar.com?

 Goodreturn

 Tax ibenefit

 Other/both

Q15) iRate iyour ioverall isatisfaction iwith iinsurance ipolicies iof iPolicybazaar.com?

 Highlysatisfaction

 Satisfactory

 Average

 Dissatisfaction