Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

1. On February 19, 1968, Smt. Krishna Wanti Puri widow of Late Dharam Pal Puri instituted an action against the Life Insurance Corporation for the recovery of Rs, 85,000/- and profits and interest on the four policies.

2. Dharam Pal Puri when he was alive insured his life with the Corporation and took out four policies, particulars whereof are as under:- Date               Policy Amount         Policy No. 12-10-1959         Rs. 10,000/-          6081583 12-6-1961          Rs. 25,000/-          6151357 10-3-1964          Rs. 45,000/-          6297731 15-6-1964          Rs. 5,000/-           6315544

3. Dharam Pal Puri died on 5th August 1964. The widow claims the amount of the four policies from the Corporation on the ground that she is the assignee. The Corporation resists the suit. The main ground of defense is that Dharam Pal Puri was suffering from heart disease, that he know about his ailment, that he had consulted doctors about his disease but fraudulently suppressed these facts. In the proposal forms and the personal statements he made declarations knowing them to be false because he never disclosed to the Corporation that he, was suffering from heart disease.

7. In identical terms were the answers of the deceased in all the four policies. On the basis of these statements the Corporation issued the policies.

8. On the death of Dharam Pal Puri the widow made a claim and gave to the Corporation the certificate of death of her husband. From the certificate the Corporation came to know that the deceased was admitted in Sir Ganga Ram Hospital on 4th August, 1964 and died there on 5th August. 1964. The Corporation also learnt that the deceased was suffering from Mitral Stenosis with auricular fibrillation and that he died of this disease in the hospital. The Corporation made certain investigations and as a result came to the conclusion that Dharam Pal Puri was suffering from this heart disease since 1959 in any case, if not earlier. The Corporation contacted the three doctors named above and took from them certificates stating that the deceased was suffering from this heart disease.

(1) The suggestion as to a fact of that which is not true by one who does not believe it to be true; and (2) the active concealment of a fact by one having knowledge or belief of the fact.

Judged by the standard laid down in Section 17, Dharam Pal Puri was clearly guilty of a fraudulent suppression of material facts when he made declarations in the proposal form statements which he must have known were deliberately false.

38. The counsel for the plaintiff has argued that the statement of Dr. (Miss) S. Padmawati should not be believed as the original record of the Lady Hardinge Medical College and Hospital was not produced in court at the time she made her statement, This is true that she gave her deposition in court with the help of the certificate which she had issued in 1964, though she was examined on November 9, 1970. In the course of arguments I ordered that the original record of the hospital should be produced. Today the medical record keeper appeared in court and stated that the record of outdoor patients was maintained in the hospital only for a period of five years and was destroyed thereafter, Dharam Pal Puri was examined by Dr. (Miss) S. Padmavati as an outdoor Patient obviously. Dr. (Miss) S. Padmavati did not depose that Dharam Pal Puri was admitted to the hospital the record of outdoor patients, therefore could not be produced. Probably by 1970 when Dr. (Miss) S. Padmavati was examined in court the record of the hospital had been destroyed because she examined the patients in 1959. The fact of the destruction of the record does not destroy the probative value of Dr. (Miss) S. Padmavati's evidence. In her statement she unequivocally stated that she examined Dharam Pal Puri on two occasions and had referred to the record before signing the statement land that the deceased was suffering from heart disease. I have not reason to disbelieve the testimony of a doctor of the eminence of Dr. (Miss) S. Padmavati. What axe had she to grind, what motive to perjure herself? I feel confident to found my conclusion on her evidence because similar was the evidence of Dr. V. K. Dewan and of Dr. Santosh Singh in his two earlier certificates dated October 31, 1964, and the report dated August 4, 1964.