IN A DECLINING MARKET LIC IMPROVES ITS MARKET SHARE (an in-depth analysis of the performance of the life insurance industry)

That F.Y.2011-12 would be a period of considerable stress for the life insurance industry, as indeed for the entire financial sector, was expected. The fact, therefore, that the industry witnessed a negative growth of 9.2% in first year premium (individual and group) and a shortfall of 8.2% in number of individual policies issued during the year comes as no surprise. The deficit for LIC was lower at 5.7% while for the private sector companies it was much higher at 16.9%. In respect of new policies sold during the year LIC came close to its performance of 2010-11(the deficit is only 3.47%) but for the private companies the shortfall is a worrying and staggering 24.05%.It is evident that in a scenario where the life insurance industry, as a whole, has looked downbeat LIC seems to have weathered the storm with relatively greater success (Annexures I, II and III).

It is on the basis of another parameter(the comparison with 2009-10 figures) that LIC scores over the private insurers in it performance of 2011-12.Although the life insurance industry,and the LIC, show a positive growth over the performance of 2009-10(first year premium income), for the private insurance industry ,and for most private companies,the performance of 2011-12 is not only less than 2010-11 it is also lower than 2009-10.Of course,in respect of individual policies sold the year 2009-10 has been the best ever for the industry(5.32 cr.policies) with lower number of policies sold in 2010-11(4.81 cr.policies) and lower still in 2011-12(4.41 cr.policies).On the count of policies,as should be evident, it has been a consistently downward trend for the LIC,the private insurers and thus for the entire industry as well.It is revealing that that 1.91 crore (19.1 million) fewer individual policies were sold last year than than two years back.This is a trend that should worry the industry for fewer policies translates into fewer policyholders.

It is now over ten years since the insurance industry was opened up to competition and it is to LIC’s credit or perhaps to the inability of private insurers to make much headway in a competitive environment where LIC holds supreme or even to the inherent nature of life insurance business where trust and credibility count for much more than in other businesses At no point in the history of post-privatization life insurance industry in India has the market share of LIC dipped below 60.89% (in 08-09) in first year premium and 70.52% (also in 08-09) in number of policies. (Annexure B). It was during the year 08-09 when LIC’s market share reached rock bottom (till now) and that of the private players hit an all time high of 39.11% (till now) that whispers of the insurance behemoth losing its grip and hold in the market had started to emerge. Talk of LIC turning out to be another failed public sector undertaking was already doing the rounds. The year subsequent to 08-09 i.e. 09-10 proved to be the turnaround year for LIC which saw its market share increasing to 65.08% (in first year premium) and 73.01% (in policies). Every year after 09-10 has seen LIC improving its share, in first year premium and policies, and the private insurers losing ground steadily year after year. In the year just passed (2011-12) which witnessed a decline in performance, for LIC and the private players, the market share of LIC increased to 71.35% (from 68.70% in the previous year) in first year premium and an even more impressive 80.90% ( from 76.91%) in number of new policies issued. The year 2011-12, for various reasons, was not a good one for the life insurance industry and for the LIC but it was much worse for the private companies.

The performance of the industry in the year gone by may have not have satisfied most people but a closer look reveals several positives. While it is the performance in individual business (a deficit of 21.9%) (Annexure C) that has been the drag on the overall industry achievement for the year the group insurance premium has shown a healthy growth of 15.1% (Annexure D). Both LIC and the private companies have fared poorly in individual business (the deficit for the private companies is higher) but have performed well in expanding their respective group insurance business (the growth of private companies is higher). The increasing preference of life insurance companies and of customers, including groups and corporates, for group insurance products, perhaps at the expense of individual policies (the share of group insurance premium in total first year premium increased from 34.31% in 10-11 to 43.53% in 2011-12) (Annexure E) could be a pointer at the direction in which the life insurance industry is headed. In the case of LIC nearly half (47.90%) of the first year premium came through the group insurance route in 2011-12 compared with 32.64% (up from 22.67%) for the private companies. The immense contribution of group insurance schemes in providing life insurance benefits, at relatively inexpensive rates, to a large number of individuals can be estimated from the number of lives covered through group schemes in recent years-6.57 crs. in 11-12 and 8.33 crs. in 10-11. (Annexure F) One needs to keep in mind that in sharp contrast the number of individual policies (not lives) sold in 2011-12 was only 4.41 crs (2.16 cr. less than the number of lives covered through the group insurance portfolio). Inclusive of coverage of lives through group schemes the contribution of the Indian life insurance industry towards providing security to crores of our countrymen deserves to be specially acknowledged.

There was another silver lining in the performance of the industry last year. No doubt the steep fall in first year premium income in individual business is a concern and cause for anxiety but a closer look at the figures reveals that the overall deficit of21.9% is largely on account of the 48.7% shortfall in single premium business which after all may not be such a bad thing for the life insurance industry. Single premiums which accounted for 43.40% of total individual first year premium in 2010-11 contributed only 28.70% of the total first year premium for the year 2011-12. (in the case of LIC the share of single premiums in individual new business came down to 31.52% from 52.90% in just one year) (Annexure G) The focus has very clearly shifted, on account of a choppy stock market, unfavorable regulatory interventions, a slowing economy etc., from life insurance being seen as an instrument of investment rather than as one that provided protection and security in times of distress for the family. The single premium business for LIC in 2011-12 lags that of the previous year by a huge 51.5% (Annexure C) but simultaneously in a smart and adroit shift of marketing strategy with greater focus on traditional products (which seems to have paid rich dividends) LIC’s premium from the non-single portfolio exceeded that of 2010-11 by 18.13% which also accounted for the industry, and not only LIC, coming very close to the performance from this segment in 2010-11.It would be interesting to see if this trend continues for the LIC this year also. While it is difficult to look into the crystal bowl and predict the future but, for the moment, it does appear that the hey-days of the single premium bonanza are over and gone.

Although it is yet early to write the epitaph of the single premium business there is little doubt that the non single premium business which would include business of the traditional mould got a big boost in 2011-12 largely because of LIC’s change of strategy which not only resulted in higher first year non-single premium but also larger number of policies from this segment compared with the previous year. LIC’s performance presents an uneven picture with loss in single premium business being compensated, partially but not wholly, through very good work in the non-single premium segment. For the private players it is an unrelieved ‘red’ all the way—‘red’ in single premium,’ red ‘in non-single premium and ‘red’ in policies of both single and non-single variety .The only ‘green’ has been provided, in the case of the private companies, by a good performance in the group business segment.

The phenomenal growth of single premium business, especially of LIC, in the last few years has completely changed the traditional perception of life insurance which was intended to be an accumulation of small amounts of savings paid as premium, over extended periods of time in quarterly, half-yearly or annual instalments. The popularity of long term traditional products ensured a close relationship between policyholder and agent who received a handsome commission every time the premium got paid. The insurer (mostly LIC), in turn, saw its renewal premium growing and the community of life insurance agents also prospered. The advent of ULIPs in the years immediately after competition was introduced in the industry and then the surge in single premium business altered the scenario completely. The renewal premium of insurers, and of LIC in particular, and the commission earnings of agents was under pressure. The revival of interest in traditional products like endowment, money back, term insurance et al even without the huge amounts of single premiums, may therefore prove a blessing in disguise for the life insurance industry in shoring up its renewal premium income and ensuring that life insurance agents continue with the profession .While regular premium business is the bread and butter of life insurance companies, and of life insurance agents, (and which probably explains why the profession has proved lucrative for successful agents) there is no denying the fact that there will always be a small segment of the insurable population that will favor and may indeed prefer and have need for single premium life insurance. The reality of the average life insurance policyholder is, however, different as he years for financial security for his family, especially in a time and situation when he is no longer there, when it is the regular premium life insurance policy, rather than the single premium one, which offers the more affordable and the more attractive alternative.


Will the strategy of LIC of focusing on non-single or traditional products on which returns are secure but low work for the private companies also? Not necessarily and this is because of the overpowering strength of the brand of LIC and its much more committed agency force-the two unique attributes of LIC which its competitors have not yet been able to acquire. LIC has further strengthened its already established credibility through a much better performance in the area of customer service which in life insurance business will ultimately mean the speed and alacrity with which the company settles claims of its policyholders, especially death claims. Traditional products require a long term relationship between the customer and the insurer and until and unless a feeling of trust exists or is steadily built up the insurer will find it difficult to acquire new customers, hold on to existing ones and indeed retain a loyal and dedicated agency organization. One of the main reasons why LIC ‘s claim of being synonymous with ‘TRUST’ enjoys credibility is because of its vastly superior track record of settling death claims. As per IRDA ANNUAL REPORT 2010-11(Page 18) LIC paid 97.03% of its death claims as against the private insurers’ 86.04% as on 31st.March 11.; similarly the private companies repudiated 8.90% of the death claims received by them while for LIC the percentage of repudiated claims was a very low 1%. It is therefore not surprising that with every passing year LIC is able not only to retain its market share but to improve upon it. One need not have knowledge of rocket science to state that the private insurance companies will have to improve their claims performance very substantially to be able to take on LIC and become credible players in the Indian market. Not only through announcements and TV ads (these are also necessary) but through quick settlement of death claims on the ground and listening to the customer must the life insurance companies proclaim that they are here for the long haul and as one multi-national bank operating successfully in India promises ‘WE ARE HERE FOR GOOD’. The high feeling of trust LIC enjoys with its customers and the public at large is on account of its servicing and more specifically its record of paying claims without unnecessary delays that places it in a unique position to be the market leader which in turn also makes it easier for it (LIC) to also recruit quality agents, this is an area in which private insurers experience considerable difficulty, and to retain their loyalty over an extended period of time. The one lesson that life insurance companies should have learnt is that in this business there are no quick fixes and that it tests one’s patience and perseverance like no other business but you can emerge the winner with these two attributes and with proper mix of the right marketing strategy and focus on the needs and expectations of the customers.

Historically the month of March, which marks the conclusion of the financial year, is a period of hectic marketing activity for the entire financial sector and certainly for the life insurance industry and LIC in particular. Some of the factors that may have contributed to March being a special month may not have much relevance today but the ‘halo’ or ‘aura’ associated with the month seems to have persisted even in the year 2011-12.Very few people take life insurance policies for tax breaks nowadays and yet , perhaps because of a tradition long followed and performance incentives linked to achievement of annual targets ,the month of March gets transformed into a period of hectic marketing activity and sometimes high productivity also. It is even believed that potential life insurance customers are more amenable to purchasing life insurance policies than in any other month and many life insurance agents, dormant for eleven months, start moving with a spring in their steps in the month of March. There have been efforts to deprive the month of March its unique status and to some extent these efforts may also have succeeded. In the year 2010-11, for example, the month of March accounted for 17.4% and 18.6% of the annual first year premium and number of policies respectively which though higher than in earlier years was not exceptional. These percentages increased to 21.2% (first yr. premium -- group and individual) and 20.5% (individual policies) in the year 2011-12 (Annexure G). The negative trend in business was reversed in the month of March 2012 (month on month) and though the overall figures for the year remained in the ‘red’ the extent of deficit got reduced significantly. Quite often the launch of a new product or the imminent closure of a popular scheme or even the announcement of an attractive incentive scheme for the marketing team have the potential to act as powerful triggers for an exceptional performance. Any of these factors could have lifted the March 2012 figures to make the annual performance look less satisfactory than what it would been otherwise. In the life insurance industry in India the ‘push’ factor continues to have tremendous ’’ pull’ and quite often the energy and commitment of a motivated work force can make all the difference between the ordinary and the extraordinary. Much can therefore be said in favor of creating ,as we have seen in 2011-12, the March ‘hype’ or the March ‘fever’ but there can always be a contrarian view that there is nothing special about the month of March and that it is as good or as bad as any other month. The advantages of even spread of business and marketing activity in all the twelve months of the year are unexceptionable but the special significance of the month of March in boosting performance is also undisputed. The fact that over one-fifth of the year’s business was procured in a single month in f.y 2011-12 speaks for itself.

Private insurance companies made their foray in the Indian market in the year 2000-01.Their number at that time was 4 which increased to 11 within a year (2001-02) and is now 23 with the latest company to jump on to the bandwagon being Edelweiss Tokio Life which commenced operations in 2011-12.These twenty three companies compete with LIC but more with each other and today occupy amongst themselves 28.64% and 19.10% of the market space in first year premium and policies respectively. The number of companies with market share of one percent and above(first year premium) was only 8 with SBI Life (5.71%), ICICI Prudential Life (4.45%), HDFC Standard Life (3.36%), Bajaj Allianz Life (2.38%) and Birla SunLife (1.69%) occupying the first five positions—the remaining 3 being Max New York Life (1.67%), Reliance Life (1.58%) and Kotak Mahindra OM ((1.02%). Incidentally these 8 companies, together with Met Life ,are the only 9 private insurers whose first year premium in 2011-12 was in excess of Rs.1000 (one thousand ) crores. Interestingly these 9 companies, and 2 more-TATA AIG Life (0.82%) and ING VYSYA Life (0.56%) -- were also the first 11 companies to set up shop in India more than ten years back. Though the life insurance market may appear crowded at first sight the fact is that as many as 15 out of the 23 private insurers(over 65%) had a market share of less than 1% and those with a first year premium income below 1,000 crores were only 14.The need for these companies to expand the scale of their activities is obvious. In a year when the industry’s performance has been rather lack lustre –in the case of a few companies the fall has been very sharp indeed(Reliance Life, ICICI Prudential Life, Bharti Axa Life, ShriRam Life, IDBI Federal Life, Tata AIG Life)--- a glimmer of hope is provided by the performance of a small number(4) of companies----MET Life, India First Life, Star Union Daiichi and DLF Pramerica Life-- which have shown growth in their first year premium income over their performance of the previous year.

If the market share available to 23 private insurers in first year premium was 28.64%, in number of new policies issued in 2011-12--an area in which LIC with its team of agents active in the remotest areas of the country has always been much stronger—their share was only 19.10%--LIC’s being 80.90%.Out of the 4.41 crore new individual policies sold during the year LIC accounted for 3.57 crs. while the private companies sold 84.36 lakh policies.. Overall fewer new policies were sold in 2011-12 (less by 8.22%) although LIC’s deficit (3.47%) was much lower than that of the private companies (24.05%). 3 companies-Reliance Life, Bajaj Allianz and ICICI Pru—achieved the distinction of selling once again more than one million or ten lakh (though less than in the previous year) policies with market share of 2% or more. Another four breached the half-million mark yet again (though alls with a minus) --- SBI Life (881550), Birla SunLife (847278), HDFC Standard Life (814726) and Max New York Life (571485). 9 more companies sold between one lakh and three lakh new policies during the year. Although most companies sold a much smaller number of policies compared with the earlier year there were a few-5 in all-which sold a higher number than in 2010-11.(Met Life, Sahara Life, Shri Ram Life, Star Union Daiichi and India First).The market share of each of these companies ranged from 0.45% for Met Life to 0.16% for Sahara Life.

One is not sure whether the contribution of Group Insurance to the growth of life insurance in our country is being adequately recognized. Here is some data that one needs to ponder over. In the year 2011-12, 43.53% of life insurance first year premium came through group insurance schemes (up from 34.31% in 2010-11). In the case of LIC and SBI Life—the other big player in group business(and ICICI Prudential) -- the percentage of group business to total first year premium is higher at 47.90% and 48.85% respectively. More importantly, at a time when individual new business has witnessed huge contraction(down by 21.96%) it is the group insurance business which has provided a veneer of respectability to a performance which might have otherwise appeared downright depressing by showing a very healthy and impressive growth of 15.1%.LIC is, as expected, by far the biggest player—bigger than even in individual business—in group business by occupying 78.52% (39047 crs out of 49729 crs) of the market (in 2010-11 its market share was 79.31%) space. As mentioned, the other two companies which have contributed handsomely to the group insurance segment are SBI Life (3188.02 crs.) and ICICI Pru (2029.38 crs.), HDFC Standard Life (930.32 crs.), Bajaj Allianz (911.39 crs.), Birla Sunlife (676.06 crs.) and India First (597.06 crs.). A few other companies—Reliance Life, Aviva, Kotak Mahindra OM, Met Life, Star Union Daiichi, Canara HSBC OBC Life and Max New York Life-have also done well in this segment. Two other aspects of group insurance performance need mention --one is that a big portion of the new premium comes as single premium (68% in 11-12) and the other is the large number of lives(not policies as in individual insurance)—6.57 cr. Individuals— that were covered through group insurance schemes. Apart from LIC which covered 3.78 crore individuals through group insurance Bajaj Allianz has also done very well by providing cover to 1.04 cr. lives. The other companies that have provided cover to large number of individuals through group insurance schemes are Max New York Life. Kotak Mahindra OM, ICICI Prudential, Reliance Life, HDFC Standard Life, Birla Sun Life, Met Life, SBI Life, India First. Shri Ram Life TATA AIG Life, Star Union Daiichi and IDBI Federal. With much lower premium rates and facility of premium payment through a centralized authority and other conveniences (no medical examination required for instance) group insurance products which are generally marketed by salaried employees of insurers or Corporate Agents, including banks, and not individual direct agents, looks set to overtake conventional individual business in premium income (the number of lives covered through group schemes are already much more than the number of individual policies ) in the next few years ,if not in the current year itself.

There is no doubt that at first sight the performance of the life insurance industry appears not very satisfactory. In both first year premium income and number of policies (individual) the performance in f.y. 11-12 is lower than that of the previous year. What is even more frustrating is to see the private insurers, including the big names in the industry, who commenced operations more than ten years back, losing their steam midway and yielding space, individually and collectively, to LIC. which after eleven years of competition , rules the roost and is much stronger today vis-a vis its competitors than it was five years back. A number of companies, small in number undoubtedly, have done fairly well and the performance in the final and crucial month of March witnessed a spurt in marketing activity that the earlier months had not seen(if you can do well in one month by adopting a certain strategy you can also do well over a longer period of time). Moreover, the somewhat lackadaisical individual insurance performance has been made up, though not fully, by a sterling performance on the group insurance side. It is also expected that the decline in single premium business, especially of LIC and its greater focus on sale of traditional products may contribute to a rise in the growth of renewal premium of LIC which may not be a bad thing for the insurance behemoth (it is revealing that LIC’s renewal premium in 2010-11 grew at only 1.66% against the growth of private insurers at 18.94%) (IRDA Annual Report 10-11, Page 14). Thus there are a few positives that can be identified in the industry’s performance of last year. The obvious need is to build up on these positives though the prescription will differ from insurer to insurer.

Another piece of data that further corroborates the huge domination of LIC over its competitors is that, apart from occupying 71.36% (in premium) and 80.90%( in number of policies) of the market in new business , it accounts for a whopping 86.86% of all policies( 32.91 crs.) in force as on 31st.March,2011 and 69.77% of total premium ( 291604 crs.) – including renewal premium- in 2010-11. (IRDA Annual Report 2010-11). After more than a decade of competition this is a huge slice of the cake. In a country where successful public sector entities that were accorded the ‘Nav Ratna’ and the ‘Maha Ratna’ status and were once the pride of the nation are biting the dust and are but a shadow of their once glorious past .LIC stands alone, quite strong and at present unchallenged. Rare would be the instances of companies, once monopolies, but subsequently exposed to competition, continuing to hold three-fourths of the market share even after more than ten years.

Good work has been done by the life insurance industry in the period post competition to enable the country to improve its insurance penetration ratio to 4.40% in 2010(though it is possible that the ratio may come down in 2011).There is however huge untapped potential not only in the metros and major cities but in mid-size and smaller towns and even villages. More importantly more than half of the country’s population is under thirty years of age who, one assumes are largely without any insurance cover at present, will need protection of life insurance and old age security (pension) in the next few years. To what extent are the life insurers in a position to tap this potential and to accept this challenge in terms of their products, their marketing strategies and their distribution network? Will it be the traditional products, especially term insurance products providing pure protection or ULIPs-no longer the flavor they used to be- or even group insurance products which have seen a meteoric rise in their popularity in the last few years that will attract the attention of the insurers and the imagination of the insurable population? Despite the launching of the National Pension Scheme (NPS) the PFRDA has still to receive parliamentary approval with the result that pension reforms, which the country sorely needs, are getting stalled indefinitely. Equally important is the choice of the distribution channels; while LIC gets most of its individual business through the individual agency channel (97.45% in 2010-11) the private players have relied, to a much greater extent, on alternate channels ( 53.11% in 2010-11) like banks and corporate agents and some even on direct selling for marketing term insurance products .The aspect of servicing in life insurance, largely a long term contract, is crucial and while you can, through use of technology, keep your policyholders happy and satisfied as long as they are alive the same technology will not come to your rescue to settle a death claim and keep a claimant from feeling disgruntled and dissatisfied if the claim is not settled on time. It boils down to trust and credibility which can be built up through sensitivity to customer requirements that would include, most certainly, timely settlement of death claims. Let underwriting standards be strict and rigorous but once the insurer has decided to accept the risk on an individual’s life it has little business to deny the payment of claim. The goodwill that LIC enjoys is also largely because of its vastly superior track record of settling claims which makes it easier for its agents to sell larger volumes of new business with greater success and less resistance. It needs to be mentioned here that in the area of devising term insurance products at competitive rates and offering them online some of the private insurers have displayed appreciable innovation and agility but this has apparently not contributed to any significant increase in their business as of now.

Lest this article not appear excessively adulatory of LIC and its achievements the temptation for the public sector life insurance giant to rest on its laurels must be resisted. The performance of LIC, good as it undoubtedly is, appears better in the context of the relatively less satisfactory performance of the private players. LIC today symbolizes trust not only for crores of its policyholders(over 30 crore individual policies in force together with several crore lives covered through group insurance schemes) but for the entire Indian public for whom life insurance, even after years of competition, continues to mean ‘LIC’ only. The trust and credibility built over five decades(56 years) of hard work and commitment of its work force has to be guarded assiduously and not allowed to be frittered away.LIC must continue to remind itself that for it the policyholders are supreme and therefore protection of their interests through innovative products, the best possible customer service, sensitivity to the expectations of its policyholders and tapping the yet unexploited potential for life insurance in the country are paramount. There is no room for complacency. As regards the private insurers their work is cut out for them. After showing considerable promise in the first years of competition, at least the big ones, they have steadily lost ground. In a country where millions are still uninsured or underinsured they have to make create their own niche markets and make their presence felt.

Despite the obvious potential for growth in the life insurance industry, because of a young population and rising incomes, there are a number of factors that have created an environment of negativity that could adversely impact the growth story.The fact that internationally renowned and respected names like New York Life(of Max New York Life) and now HSBC (part of the Canara HSBC Oriental Bank of Commerce Life Insurance JV) and possibly ING Life(if newspaper reports are to be believed) have decided to quit the Indian life insurance scene reflects their frustration and of other foreign entities at the slow rate of progress of private insurers in India which is partly attributable to the inability of an indecisive and vacillating government at the center to obtain, even after ten years ,parliamentary approval for its bill allowing 49% FDI in the insurance sector.Will this trend remain confined to these companies or will the contagion spread further? To make matters worse the regulatory changes have also not helped and have contributed to fall in sale of ULIPs.

How should one look at the prospects for growth in the life insurance industry in 2012-13?The macro environment ,within India and globally, appears uneasy and uncomfortable but the need for life insurance as a provider of compulsory savings and family security will persist undiminished. The performance of any sector has to be viewed in the context of its performance in the past and the potential for growth in the light of the likely growth of the Indian economy and the population that is insurable but not insured. The fact that the country’s economy is growing by around 5% to 6%, slower than earlier but nonetheless growing, while the life insurance industry has contracted, not grown, indicates that there is considerable potential for growth. LIC as the market leader has performed better than the private players but its performance gets respectability from group insurance while its individual business portfolio has faltered. It needs to take corrective steps this year to improve its individual insurance performance also. The private insurers, especially the bigger companies, which were among the first to enter the opened up insurance market and which have generally not performed very well last year need to introspect and take remedial measures .Like LIC some of them have done well in promoting group insurance business which is an avenue which can be pursued, if they consider appropriate, with greater vigor. They also have the advantage of a lower base and should be ahead of LIC in registering higher growth rates. They need also to consider that as they go about improving persistency levels of existing policies (a mix of right selling and good servicing) their new business must also head north and show growth year after year—every year-- in premium income (first year and renewal) and in number of policies also, which in a populous country like ours, is not only possible but necessary also as it contributes to building up of a base of a large and ever increasing number of satisfied customers. The insurance industry was opened up with a lot of expectations and it is upto each of the constituents-- LIC, the private insurers , the Life Insurance Governing Council and the IRDA—to do their bit and ensure a performance for the industry that the country expects of them and finally as one leading private insurer’s ad puts it appropriately and succinctly ‘ZINDAGI SAR UTHA KE JIYO’ In order for the life industry to hold its head high all insurers will have to pull their weight and take it forward collectively. The year 2011-12 was a year of indifferent performance and this itself plus grit and the determination to do well can become a platform for high growth this year.

(The writer of Above Article is - Shri N.C. SHARMA, ex M.D.LIC 0f INDIA)