S.C.VYAS,PRESIDENT (ORAL) - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against order dated 30.6.2009 of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Durg (hereinafter called "District Forum" for short), in complaint case No. 51/2009, whereby the complaint of the appellant herein, for direction to the respondent to pay sum assured Rs. 2,40,000 along with compensation of Rs. 20,000 has been dismissed, on the ground that the insured, at the time of making proposal for insurance, has deliberately concealed the material facts regarding his existing ailments.
(2.) IT is not in dispute that, the husband of the appellant herein, namely Madhav Singh, who was working in Bhilai Steel Plant, had purchased five insurance policies having total sum assured Rs. 2,40,000, in the year 2004, thereafter on 24.2.2005, he died. Claim was preferred by the appellant herein, being nominee of the deceased, which was repudiated by the Insurance Corporation, on the ground that no amount of claim was payable on account of concealment of material information. Then a complaint was filed before the District Forum, in reply of which the respondent/L.I.C. of India has taken the same defence and averred that on investigation, it was found that insured Madhav Singh, was suffering from disease of Sickle Cell for last so many years. At the time of making proposal for insurance also, he was suffering from that disease. He was also on leave on account of such disease on many occasions, but information regarding the disease, as well as of being on leave, on the ground of health, was willfully concealed by the insured and thus the contract of the insurance had become void and no amount was payable. Thus, in repudiating the claim of the appellant herein, no deficiency in service has been committed. Learned District Forum agreed with the defence of O.P. and dismissed the complaint.
(3.) WE have heard arguments of both parties and perused the record of the District Forum. Learned Counsel for the appellant very vehemently argued that the proposal forms for insurance, were filled up by the Agent and so whatever information has been written in such proposal form, was on account of failure of the Agent himself and the insured cannot be blamed for concealing any information in these proposal forms. He has drawn our attention towards column of declaration of Proposer, the column regarding personal history and the column, in which it has been mentioned that the contents in the proposal forms, has been explained to the insured. He submitted that all these columns have been signed by the insured but other entries in these columns are missing, which indicate that only signature of the insured was taken on these proposal forms. He also submitted that though most of the policies were obtained through the same Insurance Agent, but description of all other pre -existing policies were not given in the proposal forms. It has also been stated that Development Officer of the Life Insurance Corporation of India, was the same, but even then he has not noticed any such discrepancy. On the basis of these arguments, it has been submitted that the allegation against the deceased insured, regarding concealment of material information, has no basis and learned District Forum has committed a mistake in dismissing the complaint. Affidavit of the complainant/ appellant herein, has also been filed by learned Counsel for the appellant along with an application under Order 41 Rule 27 of CPC to show that it was the Agent, who filled up the proposal forms.;