State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Sapna Rani W/O Late Sh. Nirmal Jeet Dhand ... vs Life Insurance Corporation Of India, ... on 26 September, 2012
PUNJAB STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
DAKSHIN MARG, SECTOR 37-A, CHANDIGARH
First Appeal No.1264 of 2008
Date of institution: 5.11.2008
Date of decision : 26.09.2012
Sapna Rani W/o Late Sh. Nirmal Jeet Dhand VPO Sidhwan Bet, Distt.
Ludhiana.
.....Appellant/Complainant
Versus
1. Life Insurance Corporation of India, Jeevan Parkash,
Divisional Office, Urban Estate, Phase-1, Dugri, Ludhiana
through Sr. Divisional Manager.
2. Life Insurance Corporation of India, Kailash MKt, Near New
Dana Mandi, Jagraon, Ludhiana, through authorized signatory.
.....Respondents/Opposite Parties
First Appeal against the order dated
11.9.2008 passed by the District Consumer
Disputes Redressal Forum, Ludhiana.
Before:-
Sardar Jagroop Singh Mahal,
Presiding Judicial Member
Sardar Jasbir Singh Gill, Member Argued by:-
For the appellant : Sh. Munish Goel, Advocate For the respondents : Sh. Deepak Arora, Advocate JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER This is complainant's appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the order dated 11.9.2008 passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ludhiana (in short the District Forum) vide which the complaint was dismissed. First Appeal No.1264 of 2008 2
2. The present complaint was filed by Sapna Rani alleging that her husband Nirmal Jeet Dhand had obtained two policies each for Rs. 1 lac on 24.2.2006 and 9.3.2006 and the 3rd policy for Rs. 1,05,000/- on 24.2.2006 in all of which the complainant was the nominee. It was contended that her husband died on 29.6.2006 due to hear attack regarding which a claim was lodged with the O.P/respondent, but they repudiated the claim on 31.1.2007 on the ground that he did not disclose having remained admitted in civil hospital, Jagraon for the period from 3.11.2005 to 21.11.2005. It was alleged that the disease of breathlessness and chest pain which was diagnosed by doctor as pneumothorax has no nexus with the heart attack due to which he died. The complainant has alleged that the order of repudiation is wrong and malafide and should be set-aside and therefore, the O.Ps be directed to pay Rs. 3,05,000/- alongwith interest @ 18% p.a. and cost of litigation as Rs. 10,000/-. She also prayed for Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for mental tension and harassment.
3. The complaint was opposed by the O.Ps admitting that the three policies were obtained by Nirmal Jeet Dhand on the said dates as alleged by the complainant, that Nimral Jeet Dhand had remained admitted in civil hospital, Jagraon for the period from 3.11.2005 to 21.11.2005 for breathlessness and chest pain but this fact was not disclosed by him in the proposal form. It was alleged that contract of insurance depends upon utmost good First Appeal No.1264 of 2008 3 faith and where the policy is obtained by concealing material facts, it becomes void, ab initio and the complainant is not entitled to any compensation. They contended that the claim was rightly repudiated and the complaint be dismissed.
4. Both the parties were given opportunity to adduce evidence in support of their contentions.
5. After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, the learned District Forum vide impugned order dated 11.9.2008 dismissed the complaint. The complainant has challenged the same through the present appeal.
6. The complainant admitted in Para No. 4 of the complaint that at the time of filing the personal statement on health, the columns were filled up by the agent who did not ask Nirmal Jeet Dhand about his previous ailment. Rather the agent was apprised the previous treatment taken by Nirmal Jeet Dhand in the civil hospital and therefore there was no misstatement of facts. It was also alleged that breathlessness or chest pain with which Nirmal Jeet Dhand was diagnosed by doctor of civil hospital, Jagraon, has no nexus with the heart attack with which he died and therefore the repudiation of the claim is totally wrong. This contention was not accepted by the learned District Forum. We are also not inclined to accept the same. One thing is clear that Nirmal Jeet Dhand remained admitted in civil hospital, Jagraon for 19 days on account of breathlessness and First Appeal No.1264 of 2008 4 chest pain. In this respect, we may refer to the certificate Ex. R- 4 issued by Medical Officer, civil hospital, Jagraon. The complainant has also admitted this fact.
7. Ex. R-I, R-2 and R-3 are the proposal froms filled up by Nirmal Jeet Dhand. The previous admission in the hospital was not mentioned by him in the same. There was therefore, concealment of facts from the O.Ps.
8. The contention of the counsel for the complainant/appellant is that chest pain and breathlessness has no nexus with the heart attack with which Nirmal Jeet Dhand died. This contention was not accepted by the learned District Forum. We also do not to accept the same. In fact the breathlessness and chest pain are the leading symptoms of heart attack, it was therefore necessary for Nirmal Jeet Dhand to disclose in Ex. R-1 to R-3 about his previous ailment and treatment and if the same has not been mentioned then concealment nullifies the insurance policy obtained by him by concealing the material facts. Contract of insurance would not be binding on the O.Ps/respondents and therefore the complainant cannot get any benefit out of the said policies.
9. In view of the above discussion, we are of the opinion that the learned District Forum rightly dismissed the complaint. There is no merit in this appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed.
10. Parties are left to bear their own cost. First Appeal No.1264 of 2008 5
Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of costs.
(JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL) PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER (JASBIR SINGH GILL) MEMBER September 26, 2012.
Rupinder