Rekha Gupta, Presiding Member—The present revision petition has been filed against the judgment dated 17.08.2016 of the Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Panchkula (“the State Commission”) in Appeal no. 528 of 2016.

2. The facts of the case as per the respondent/ complainant are that the respondent requested for compensation on account of death of her son Ravi Kumar who obtained a policy no. 179603061 for Rs.5.00 lakh. At the time of issuance of the policy he was examined by the doctors of the petitioner/ opposite party and no abnormality was found. Unfortunately he fell ill and expired on 16.07.2013 in PGI MS Chandigarh. Her claim was repudiated on 31.03.2014 without any reasonable ground.

3. In reply, the petitioner admitted the policy but alleged that medical examination of the deceased life assured (DLA) was not conducted by any doctor at the time of obtaining the insurance policy. As per form no. 3816 which was received from PGI Chandigarh, the DLA was suffering from Idiopathic Dilated Cardiomyopathy since February 2013, whereas the insurance policy commenced from 28.05.2013. He remained admitted to PGI MS, Chandigarh from 06.05.2013 to 28.05.2013 for