Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 26 (0.91 seconds)
Documents citing Lic Of India vs Joginder Kaur And Ors. on 23 September, 2004

M/S Icici Prudential Life Insurance ... vs 1. Mrs. Veena Sharma Wife Of Late Shri ... on 3 February, 2014

10. The appellant has miserably failed to produce any cogent and convincing evidence to prove that on the date of submitting the proposal form (Exhibit R-1), that is, on 20th of November, 2008 the life assured was suffering from diabetes and was having knowledge of the same. Support can be had from the judgment rendered by Honble National Commission in L.I.C. of India versus Joginder Kaur and Another, 2005(1) C.P.C. 52 (N.C.), wherein it has been held that:-
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Cites 4 - Cited by 10 - Full Document

Smt. Raksha Devi vs Life Insurance Corporation Of India on 28 July, 2006

11. Learned Counsel for the complainant referred the case law of LIC of India Vs. Joginder Kaur and another; 2005 (1) CPC, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sh. Mehenga Singh; 2004 (1) CPC 507 and LIC of India Vs. Jasvinder Kaur; III (1999) CPJ 43 in support of his submission that no evidence has been adduced to prove that the doctor had treated the insured for the said disease and simple allegation is not sufficient to prove the case of concealment of material fact. There is sufficient evidence on record to prove that the insured was suffering from CML at the time of filling the proposal form. There is also a certificate of the doctor issued in that regard. To the contrary, there is no evidence of the complainant to prove that the insured was not suffering from any disease.
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Cites 12 - Cited by 6 - Full Document

Life Insurance Corporation Of India vs Smt. Bina Joshi on 22 December, 2008

(ii) The Hon'ble National Commission in the case of LIC of India Vs. Joginder Kaur and others; II (2005) CPJ 78 (NC), has held that the contention of the insurer that the deceased was suffering from diabetes mellitus, was chronic alcoholic and had an attack of jaundice, was not acceptable in absence of any legally admissible evidence in support thereof.
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Cites 9 - Cited by 4 - Full Document

Lic vs Raj Rani on 15 November, 2012

In First Appeal No.566 of 2008 5 case, "Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Joginder Kaur and others, II (2005) CPJ 78", the Hon'ble National Commission held that the past history of the insured can be considered only if the affidavit of the doctor who had treated him earlier was produced or some other material from the hospital or the doctor is produced to prove the record of the previous treatment. In the present case, there is no mention as to from where Ved Prakash was getting treatment for hypertension nor the record from Pakistan where Ved Prakash was alleged to have got renal transplant has been produced/proved. In the absence of primary evidence, the mere past history recorded in Ex.R4 cannot be held sufficient to repudiate the claim.
State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 Next