SUBHASH CHANDRA
Life Insurance Corporation of India – Appellant
Versus
Bhajno – Respondent
ORDER
Subhash Chandra, Presiding Member—This revision petition filed under section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, the ‘Act’) assails the order of the State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, Punjab (in short, ‘State Commission’) in First Appeal No. 582 of 2018 dated 10.05.2017 dismissing the appeal against the order of the District Forum, Ropar (in short, ‘District Forum’) dated 28.04.2015. The said order directs the petitioner to pay the respondent Rs 2,00,000/- each under two policies along with 9% interest on these sums till realization apart from Rs 3000/- as compensation and Rs 2000/- as cost of litigation on account of the death of the respondent’s husband who was a policy holder of the two life policies.
2. The brief facts of the case are that on 27.03.2006, the petitioner’s husband Faqir Chand purchased a life insurance policy (No. 163096217) from the respondent for a sum of Rs 50,000/-. Subsequently, on 08.12.2010 and 29.10.2010 purchased two more policies under the respondent’s Jeevan Saral scheme (Nos. 164558088 and 164558264 respectively) for Rs 2,00,000/- each and paid the requisite premium regularly. On 21.05.2012 the respondent informed the
Satwant Kaur Sandhu vs. New India Assurance Company Limited
Rubi (Chandra) Dutta vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
Lourdes Society Snehanjali Girls Hostel and Ors. vs. H & R Johnson (India) Ltd. and Ors.
(1) National Commission - National Commission in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction Commission is not required to re-assess and re-appreciate the evidence on record.(2) National Commission - Nat....
Revisional Jurisdiction – Revisional jurisdiction of the National Commission is extremely limited, it should be exercised only in case as contemplated within the parameters specified in the provision....
The burden to prove misrepresentation or suppression of material facts in insurance contracts lies with the insurer, and claims cannot be repudiated without credible evidence.
Mere filing of some hospital records was not sufficient to show that the policy holder was suffering from the ailment at the time of filing of proposal form.
Suppression of material facts by an insured can render an insurance claim voidable, impacting the insurer's liability.
Jurisdiction in revision petitions is limited to examining jurisdictional errors without reassessing evidence or substituting concurrent findings.
(1) Proposal form – In filling up the proposal form, the agent normally, ceases to act as agent of the insurer but becomes the agent of the insured and no agent can be assumed to have authority from ....
(1) Insurance – A contract of insurance is one of utmost good faith. (2) Proposer – Proposer who seeks to obtain a policy of life insurance is duty bound to disclose all material facts bearing upon t....
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.