MADHYA PRADESH STATE CONSUMER
DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BHOPAL
Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.S. Kokje, President &
Mr. M.L. Tiwari, Member
D.K. JAIN—Appellant
versus
UNITED INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.—Respondent
Appeal No. 296 of 1993—Decided on 25.6.1994
Suppression of Material Facts - Insurance Claim - The court upheld the decision to reject the insurance claim due to the complainant's suppression of material facts regarding pre-existing medical conditions, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
Fact of the Case:
The complainant took an insurance cover for hospitalization expenses, but the Insurance Company refused to pay for incurred expenses, alleging suppression of material information about pre-existing medical conditions.
Finding of the Court:
The District Forum found actual suppression of material facts by the complainant, leading to the rejection of the claim. The court upheld this finding and dismissed the appeal.
Issues: Suppression of material facts, rejection of insurance claim
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the complainant's suppression of pre-existing medical conditions was sufficient to reject the claim, especially considering the timing of the insurance cover and subsequent expensive medical procedures.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and no costs were awarded.
Mr. Justice V.S. Kokje, President— This appeal is directed against the decision of District Forum, Bhopal rejecting a complaint against the United India Insurance Company Ltd. on the ground of suppression of material facts. The complainant/appellant took an insurance cover on 1712-90 for a year under which hospitalisation and domiciliary hospitalisation expenses were to be paid by the insurance company. In the proposal form against the column about knowledge of any positive existence or presence of any ailment, the complainant stated “Nil. Against the column of previous medical treatment also he had remarked “NA”. The complainant was examined in Escorts Heart Institute and Research Centre Okhla Road, New Delhi and Angiograpy Test was carried on him during 17.1.91 to 19.1.91. Expenses of Rs.10,700/- were incurred on this. When these expenses were claimed the Insurance Company refused to pay on the ground that material information was concealed from it by the complainant. It was alleged that complainant was suffering from hypertension for the last 20 years and he has been on regular medications for last 10 years. He was having angina in exertion for 2 years and was being treated for that also.
2. The District Forum has found that there was actual suppression of material fact on the part of the complainant which was sufficient to reject the claim. We see no reason to take a different view specially when the policy was taken on 17-12-90 and within a month Angiograply was carried out at a well known an costly hospital like Escorts Heart Institute and Research Centre, New Delhi. There is reason to believe that the insurance cover was taken in anticipation of these expenses by suppressing the ailment from the Insurance Company. If the Insurance Company has taken that view, it cannot be said to be a deficiency in service. The appeal is therefore dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Appeal dismissed.
––
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.