SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

V.S.KOKJE, M.L.TIWARI
BHARATIYA JEEVAN NIGAM – Appellant
Versus
AMNABHAI – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant :Mr. C.M. Garg, Advocate.
For the Respondent: None.

ORDER

Mr. M.L. Tiwari, Member:—The appellant being aggrieved by the order passed by District Forum, Mandsaur in Case No. 137/92 dated 24.6.93 has preferred this appeal.

2. The undisputed facts are one late Shri Usmankhan submitted a proposal for insurance of Rs. 12,000/- on 31st March, 1990, and policy was also issued by the non-applicant appellant in favour of late Shri Usmankhan under a non-medical scheme. The policy No. 340710425 for Rs. 12,000/- under table and term No. 90-15 (marriage endowment plan educational annumity with profits and accident). That the maturity date of the policy is 28th March, 2005. This policy was taken by Usmankhan as per proposal form for the performance of marriage of his daughter Ku. Razia.

3. The points for determination in this appeal are:—

(1) Whether late Usmankhan concealed material facts about the condition of health?

(2) Whether the order passed by the District Forum suffers from illegality.

4. In the order passed by the Forum on 24.6.93 the District Forum was of the view that Usmankhan submittted proposal form and it was accepted. It was the duty of the nonapplicant company before acceptance of the offer to investigate the allegations. Once pro






Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top