BARKATI DEVI Vs. L I C OF INDIA
LAWS(RAJCDRC)-2006-4-1
RAJASTHAN STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Decided on April 27,2006

Barkati Devi Appellant
VERSUS
L I C OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.)THIS appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1986") has been filed by the appellant -complainant against the order dated 30.6.2004 passed by the learned District Forum, Sikar in Case No. 119/04 by which the complaint filed by the complainant -appellant under Section 12 of the Act of 1986 was dismissed.
(2.)IT may be stated here that the complainant -appellant had filed a complaint under Section 12 of the Act of 1986 before the District Forum, Sikar on 8.4.2004 stating inter alia that on 28.10.2000, her husband Ajmeri Khan (hereinafter referred to as "the deceased") had taken insurance policy bearing No. 193133862 for Rs. 50,000 from the respondents. The said policy was lapsed with effect from 22.10.2002 because of non - payment of premium by the deceased and thereafter, it was got revived by the the deceased with effect from 22.5.2003 and at the time of seeking revival of the policy, a fresh declaration was filled in up by the deceased on 14.5.2003. The deceased had died on 30.5.2003 and after the death of the deceased, a claim was preferred by the complainant -appellant before the respondents, but that claim was repudiated by the respondents through letter dated 31.7.2003 stating inter alia that at the time of seeking revival of the policy and at the time of filling in up the fresh declaration form on 14.5.2003, the deceased was suffering from cancer and that fact was deliberately and intentionally not disclosed by the deceased in his fresh declaration form dated 14.5.2003 and thus, deceased had made incorrect statement and withheld correct information regarding his health at the time of seeking revival of policy. Thereafter, the present complaint was filed.
(3.)A reply was filed by the respondents and the respondents took the same plea which was taken by them in the repudiation letter dated 31.7.2003. It was further submitted by the respondents that the policy in question of the deceased was lapsed with effect from 22.10.2002 due to non -payment of the premium and it was got revived by the deceased with effect from 22.5.2003 and at the time of revival, deceased had filled in up a fresh declaration form on 14.5.2003 and at the time of seeking revival of policy, the deceased was suffering from cancer, but he deliberately did not disclose that fact in his fresh declaration form dated 14.5.2003 and thus, revival of the policy was sought by deceased after concealing material facts regarding health and hence, on that ground, claim of the complainant -appellant was rightly repudiated by the respondents through letter dated 31.7.2003 and the present complaint deserves to be dismissed.
After hearing the parties, the learned District Forum, Sikar, through order dated 30.6.2004 dismissed the complaint of the complainant -appellant holding inter alia.

(i) That there is no dispute on the point that the deceased had taken insurance policy from the respondents for Rs. 50,000 on 28.10.2000 and that policy was lapsed due to non -payment of premium with effect from 22.10.2002 and that policy was got revived by the deceased with effect from 22.5.2003.

(ii) That at the time of seeking revival of the policy, the deceased was aware of the fact that he was suffering from the disease of cancer, but he deliberately did not disclose that fact while seeking revival of policy and thus, it was a case of suppression of material facts regarding health by the deceased.

(iii) That the respondents were justified in repudiating the claim of the complainant appellant and there was no deficiency in service on the part of the respondents while repudiating the claim of the complainant -appellant.



Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.