- (1.) This is defendant's regular second appeal against the judgment and decree of the District Judge, Sangrur, whereby the appeal filed against the judgment and decree of the trial Court was dismissed.
(2.) Briefly put the plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 1,74,300/- the amount due under policy No. 76144564 drawn in favour of Dharam Paul deceased which claim was being contested by the Life Insurance Corporation. The trial Court on the basis of pleadings of the parties framed the following issues 1. Whether the suit of the plaintiff is bad for misjoinder of defendants Nos. 1, 3 and 4 ? If so, to what effect ? OPD. 2. Whether the plaintiff has not duly verified the plaint ? If so to what effect ? OPD. 3. Whether the contract under the policy in question is void ab initio for concealing of material facts as per preliminary objection Nos. 1 and 2 of the written statement ? If so, to what effect ? OPD. 4. If issue No. 3 is not proved, to what amount the plaintiff is entitled ? OPD. 5. Relief.
(3.) Issues Nos. 1, 2 and 3 were decided against the defendant. In view of the findings of the trial Court under issue No. 4, the plaintiff was held entitled to receive the payment of Rs. 1, 50, 000/- as principal. Rs. 7,800/- as bonus amount and further awarded a sum of Rs. 16,500/- as interest by way of damages on account of illegally withholding the amount due. This way the suit of the plaintiff for recovery of Rs. 1,74,300 with costs and future interest at the rate of 12% was decreed by the trial Court. The lower appellate Court after appraising the evidence and the legal submissions made by the counsel for the appellant found no merit in the appeal. and consequently dismissed the same, vide judgment and decree dated June 11, 1992.;