MURALA SUBBA LAKSHMI Vs. BRANCH MANAGE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA MACHILIPATNAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the unsuccessful complainant in CC 21/2007 before the District Forum I, Krishna at Machilipatnam and the insurance claim filed by the appellant/complainant was dismissed. Aggrieved by the impugned order, this appeal is filed questioning the legality and propriety of it and sought to set aside the order.

(2.) The facts of the case disclose that the complainants husband bv name Murala Veera Venakteswara Rao alias Konda alias kondala Rao during his life time took an insurance policy bearing no. 673164839 on 28.11.2003 for a sum of Rs.5 lakhs from OP 1 insurance company and he paid premia regularly. While so on 6.8.2004 he died of heart attack. At the time of giving policy a medical examination was done and the policy was issued for a period of 15 years and the complainant is the nominee for the policy. On the death of the insured, the complainant informed the death to OP 1 by submitting all original records as required in May, 2005. OP 1 had not settled the claim. Subsequently on 6.1.2007 OP 1 addressed a letter to her advocate informing that the claim is under consideration and thereafter on 21.3.2007 OP 2 informed the complainant that her husband committed Suicide within one year from the commencement of the policy. That on account of his debts he filed IP in a Court of Law to protect himself from the creditors as such the policy has become null and void which is not correct. The act or omission on the part of the opposite parties amounts to deficiency in service.

(3.) The OP 2 filed its version and the same was adopted by OP 1 stating that on 28.12.96 the complainants husband had taken a policy bearing No.671202796 for Rs.50000/- and the said policy had lapsed on 28.12.2002 for non payment of premiums. So also on 28.7.94 he had obtained another policy 6/1881114 for Rs.50,000/- and the said policy had lapsed as he was unable to pay the premiums. Therefore the said polices were under the lapsed status as on 27.1.2003 by which date he had taken the present policy for Rs. 5 lakhs. The insured had suppressed the material facts and misrepresented the facts in column no.9 of the proposal form stating that the two earlier polices were in force even though the said polices were in lapsed status. Without furnishing the income proof the insured falsely stated that his income was at Rs. 2 lakhs by doing masonry and contract works. There was fraudulent intention in obtaining the policy in question. The complainant informed the death of her husband on 06.08.2004 along with death certificate. The death of the insured took place within 8 months and 8 days from the date of taking the policy on 28.11.2003. As the claim was an earlier one, an enquiry was ordered by appointing investigating agency which revealed that the insured died by committing suicide as he was having heavily debts to the creditors and the creditors were pressurizing for repayment. As the insured had become bankrupt he filed IP 42/2004 before the Senior Civil Judge Court, Machilipatnam on 30.7.2004 just one week prior to his death. His liabilities are shown as Rs.8,05,000/- exceeding his assets. The death of assured was not due to heart attack but it is only suicidal death. He was not admitted in any governmental hospital and no certificate was issued by any doctor in this regard.