- (1.) Present appeal, at the hands of the defendant-Insurance Company, is directed against the judgments passed by both the learned courts below, whereby suit for recovery filed by the plaintiffs-respondents was decreed. Suit was decreed by the learned trial court alongwith interest @ 12% per annum, which was modified by the learned first appellate court, to the extent of 7% per annum. Cross objections have also been filed by the plaintiffs for modifying the judgment of first appellate court, raising interest @ 12% on the decretal amount, as awarded by the learned trial court. Appeal as well as cross objections are being decided together.
(2.) Brief facts of the case, as recorded by the learned first appellate court in its impugned judgment, are that the respondents are sons, daughters, widow and widowed mother of Shri Budh Ram son of Shri Paras Ram, Vaish Aggarwal, residents of village Madina Ahulana, Tehsil Gohana. Said Budh Ram had obtained an Insurance Policy bearing No. 16059176 for the insurance of his life from the appellant/Corporation on 28.3.1973. It was for a sum of Rs. 30,000/-. One Shri Surat Singh was the Agent of the Corporation. The proposal of Shri Budh Ram was accepted by the Corporation after his medical examination. In the said proposal, the age of Shri Budh Ram was given as 45 years. In the proposal, his date of birth was given as 1.5.1928. Shri Maman Chand-respondent was a nominee mentioned in the Insurance Policy. On the death of Shri Budh Ram, a claim was preferred by Shri Maman Chand respondent with the appellant/Corporation. His claim for the Insurance money was negatived by the appellant/Corporation on 10/14-3-1978 (Ex. PW 3/6). The grounds taken were that, in his proposal dated 28.3.1973 and statement dated 29.3.1973 at the time of medical examination, the deceased has given his age as 45 years and made false representation of 7 years in his age. It was also given out that had the appellant/Corporation known the true facts, it would have not accepted the proposal. Subsequent representation by Shri Maman Chand also failed. So, the respondents brought the suit before the learned trial court on 9.3.1981. They sought a decree for a sum of Rs. 30,000/- against the appellant/corporation. The costs of the suit was also claimed. It was averred that the contract between the appellant and Shri Budh Ram, deceased, was a complete contract and the same could not be repudiated after his death. In replication, all allegations of misrepresentation or concealment of facts by Shri Budh Ram were controverted. In the written statement, the appellant/corporation mainly resisted the suit on the same grounds as mentioned above. Certain preliminary objections were also taken.
(3.) On completion of the pleadings, following issues were framed by the learned trial court:- 1. Whether the policy was obtained by Budh Ram, since deceased by suppressing true facts regarding his age and health; and is void ab-initio? OPD 2. Whether the contract between Budh Ram since deceased and defendants could not be repudiated. If so to what effect? OPP 3. Whether the civil court at Gohana has no jurisdiction to try the present suit? OPD 4. Whether the plaintiffs have no cause of action. If so, to what effect? OPD 5. Whether the suit is barred by limitation? OPD 6. Whether the defendants are entitled to special costs? If so, to what effect? OPD 7. Relief.;