Reliance Gen Ins Co Ltd vs Mithalal Hiralal Jain on 18 January, 2023
9. That the Ld. Advocate for the respondent Mr. D. U. Thakkar has
supported the finding recorded by the Ld. Consumer Disputes Redressal
Forum, Surat (Additional), in allowing the complaint of the complainant
against the appellant Insurance Company that he has also submitted
that there is no any infirmity or perverseness in the finding recorded by
the Ld. Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Surat (Additional), while
allowing the complaint Ld. Advocate Mr. D. U. Thakkar, has also
submitted that the Insurance Company has falsely repudiated the claim
of the complainant on the ground of suppression of Pre-existing disease
as per the discharge summary of Asian Heart Institute, Ld. Advocate Mr.
D. U. Thakkar, has also submitted that the Insurance Company has not
produced any cogent and reliable evidence to prove the suppression of
material fact regarding Pre-existing disease by the complainant in the
proposal form. That the Ld. Advocate Mr. D. U. Thakkar, has also
submitted that on the basis of very terms and conditions/exclusion
clause of the Insurance Policy Insurance Company has repudiated claim
of the complainant but the Insurance Company has not provided alleged
terms and conditions including exclusions clause of the Policy to the
complainant. Therefore, when Insurance Company fail to provide terms
and conditions/exclusion clause of the Policy then Insurance Company
cannot relied upon the said terms and conditions/exclusion clause for
repudiation of the claim of the complainant. That Ld. Advocate Mr. D. U.
Thakkar, has placed reliance upon the judgments of the state
commission and national commission in support of his case viz. (1).