The main legal point established in the judgment is that repudiating a genuine claim by manipulating documents constitutes unfair trade practice and goes against the duty of the insurance company to provide insurance cover for the security of the family.

Mr. D.D. Bahuguna, Senior Member—This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 3.10.1996 passed by District Consumer Forum, Lakhimpur Kheri in Complaint Case No. 120/1993.

2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are as follows :

The complainant Smt. Nirmala Devi, W/o Late Shri Rajendra Giri, R/o Umaria, Distt. Lakhimpur Kheri lodged a claim before the District Forum alleging therein that the late husband of the complainant had taken a life policy from the opposite party, Life Insurance Corporation of India after completing all the formalities including filling up the proposal form. The proposal was accepted and Policy No. 210339306 dated 27.9.1990 was issued to the life assured. The policy was for a sum of Rs. 1,01,000/-. Sri Rajendra Giri died on 2.12.1990 and the complainant is the legal heir of the life assured. She has five minor daughters who are totally dependent on her. The complainant is entitled to the sum assured from the opposite party. The opposite party was approached by the complainant but the claim was not settled. A legal notice was given to the opposite party on 15.9.1993 which remained unreplied. Although the insurance involved a payment of Rs. 1,01,000/- and allied benefits but since the financial position of the complainant is bad, she cannot approach the State Commission, Lucknow and, therefore, lodged a claim for recovery of an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- only before the District Consumer Forum.

3. The opposite party in the written statement denied the allegations made in the complaint and stated that a reply to the legal notice had been sent to the complainant on 15.3.1993. The complainant is not entitled to claim any amount and the claim is not covered under the definition of service as per provisions of the Consumer Protection Act. In fact the husband of the complainant had submitted a proposal before the opposite party on 10.9.1990 to the Lakhimpur Branch of the Life Insurance Corporation of India. The proposal was under Table 14-29 for a sum of Rs. 1,01,000/-. On the basis of declaration made by the life assured, the proposal was accepted on 27.9.1990 and Policy No. 210339306 was issued along with the receipt of first premium. Late Sri Rajendra Giri at the time of submitting the proposal on 10.9.1990 concealed the fact that he had been operated upon on his stomach in May, 1989 and this fact should have been replied by him in the relevant columns of the proposal forms 18, 20 and 22. When this fact was known to the Insurance Company’s agent Sri Sharda Srivastava and Development Officer Sri Rajendra Singh, then the matter was reported to the Branch Manager of the opposite party on 1.10.1990. A letter to this effect admitting the operation was also given by the life assured in which it was stated that he had been operated upon in 1989 and by some error the fact was not mentioned in the proposal form. Thus, on the basis of the information given by the Agent and Development Officer and the letter admitting the operation submitted by the life assured the opposite party decided to cancell the policy issued. The opposite party, thereafter, on 26.11.1990 during the life-time of the life assured had informed him by registered post that the proposal dated 10.9.1990 had been cancelled and the Corporation is not liable to bear the risk on the life of the complainant’s husband. The complainant was also given a cheque dated 28.11.1990 for a sum of Rs. 1,739/- after deducting Rs. 50/- as medical fee. The Life Insurance Corporation of India is not liable for accepting any claim of the complainant after the policy was cancelled because of suppression of facts. The complainant was, therefore, informed that since the policy stood cancelled, she is only entitled to the amount of the premium deposited by the life assured minus Rs. 50/- as medical fees. The letter to this effect is dated 28.3.1991. A reply to the legal notice was duly given by the opposite party. The Insurance Company is not liable to pay any claim