Rekha Mittal, J. - (1.) The present appeal lays challenge to the judgment and decree dated 23.2.2010 passed by the District Judge, Karnal whereby the appeal preferred by Sunil Kumar, appellant against dismissal of his suit by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Karnal (hereinafter referred to as "trial court") has been dismissed and the findings recorded by the trial court have been affirmed.
(2.) Smt. Ganga Devi, mother of the appellant obtained two insurance policies bearing No. 172408466 for Rs. 50,000/ - and No. 173371983 for Rs. 1,00,000/ - with date of commencement from 24.2.2002. In the present lis, the policy in dispute is the second policy bearing No. 173371983 that was repudiated by the respondent Life Insurance Corporation of India (in short "the insurer") vide order dated 27.5.2005 on the plea that Smt. Ganga Devi (since deceased) furnished wrong information in the proposal form by concealing that she availed leave on medical grounds from 30.10.2000 to 10.12.2000, 13.12.2000 to 11.1.2001 and 1.2.2001 to 30.3.2001. Smt. Ganga Devi admittedly passed away on 20.1.2005.
(3.) The learned trial court, in view of its observations made in para 14 that the contract of insurance is ubremma fide that is based on utmost good faith held that it is the bounden duty of the policy holder to disclose all the true facts in the proposal form and not to conceal or suppress any material fact. The concealment of material facts by the policy holder vitiates the contract. By referring to judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.C. Chacko and another vs. Chairman, Life Insurance Corporation of India and others : 2008(1) Apex Court Judgments 362, it was held that as the insured did not disclose the true facts regarding her health in the proposal form and as such the contract of insurance was rightly repudiated by the defendant. The Court in appeal affirmed the findings of the trial court by taking into consideration the ratio laid down in P.C. Chacko and another's case (supra).;