Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.27 seconds)Manmohan Nanda vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd. . on 6 December, 2021
11. It has been held in Manmohan Nanda case (supra) also that
6 of 9
::: Downloaded on - 05-08-2023 08:42:13 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:101017
CWP No. 1743 of 2018 (O & M) -7- 2023:PHHC:101017
materiality of a fact is determined by circumstances of each case as
proved by evidence. Para 39 to 39.3. of the judgment are reproduced
hereinafter:
Bajaj Allianz Lic Ltd vs Dalbir Kaur on 11 January, 2019
13. The judgment relied upon by learned counsel for the respondent
in Dalbir Kaur (supra) has no application to the facts and circumstances
of this case. In that matter, the Insurance policy was issued on 12.8.2014
and the insured died on 12.9.2014. The claim was subjected to
independent investigation which revealed that the insured/diseased was
suffering from a pre-existing disease consequent upon alcohol abuse and
had vomiting of blood only a month prior to taking the policy, which was
not disclosed despite specific queries; rather, the insured stated that he
had not undergone any treatment and was not suffering from any disease
or dis-order. The claim was repudiated with two years of commencement
of policy. In the instant case, there is no evidence of any such pre-existing
disease, nor any independent investigation with regard to the stated
chronic disease of Hypertension and diabetes mellitus or its connection to
the cause of death was conducted by the Insurance company. Besides, the
claim has been repudiated after two years of issuing the policy. Therefore,
materiality of the fact allegedly suppressed must be established, which
could not be done.
Vidya Singh vs Life Insurance Corporation Of India And ... on 17 May, 2004
4. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner contends that the
death claim was wrongly rejected by the respondents, since there was no
material concealment of any fact by the deceased at the time of taking the
insurance policies. He contends, the fact that deceased was suffering from
2 of 9
::: Downloaded on - 05-08-2023 08:42:13 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:101017
CWP No. 1743 of 2018 (O & M) -3- 2023:PHHC:101017
diabetes and hypertension was not to his knowledge at the time of taking
the policies, the same, accordingly, could not have been disclosed by him.
He further contends that even otherwise, this is not a material fact which
was required to be disclosed at the time of taking the policies. He has
relied upon the judgment of this Court passed in Vidya v. Life Insurance
Corporation of India and another, 2004 (3) RCR (Civil) 793. He contends
that mere inaccuracy of statement at the time of taking the insurance
policies cannot be a ground for repudiating the claim after two years.
Smt. Sulabha Prakash Sawargaonkar vs Life Insurance Corporation Of India on 20 October, 2021
In similar factual background, the Supreme
Court in Sulbha Prakash Motegaonkar v. LIC, (2021) 13 SCC 561, has
held, in case the alleged concealment was not of a nature that would
disentitle the deceased from getting insured, the repudiation would be
unjustified. Relevant paragraph of the judgment reads as under:
1