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

1985 Supreme(Ker) 223

Judges : BALAKRISHNA MENON,SUKUMARAN
SAROJAM - Appellant
Versus
L.I.C.OF INDIA - Respondent
Case No : A.S. No. 105 of 1979
Decided On : 08/09/1985
Advocates Appeared :
V. Rama Shenoi; R. Raya Shenoi; For Appellant S. Easwara Iyer; E. Subramoni; For Respondent

The duty of disclosure in insurance contracts, based on the principle of uberrimae fides, requires the insured to disclose all material facts relating to the risk involved in the policy of insurance.

Headnote:

Insurance - Duty of Disclosure - Sections 19, 20 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 - Sections 45, 45A of the Insurance Act, 1938 - Sections 10, 11 of the Married Women's Property Act, 1874 - Sections 39, 45 of the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956

Fact of the Case:

The plaintiff, widow of Neelakanta Pillai, filed a suit against the Life Insurance Corporation of India for recovery of amounts due under two insurance policies. The defendant repudiated the policies due to fraud and suppression of material facts regarding the health of the assured.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the insured had a duty to disclose all material facts relating to his health, and the false answers given in the proposal form vitiated the contract of insurance. The defendant Corporation was entitled to repudiate the policies and decline payment.

Issues: The main issue was whether the insured's failure to disclose his serious heart ailment in the proposal form justified the repudiation of the insurance policies by the defendant Corporation.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the principle of uberrimae fides, stating that the insured owed a duty to disclose all material facts relating to his health. The false answers given in the proposal form induced the insurer to accept the proposal, justifying the repudiation of the policies.

Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the court upheld the decision of the lower court, allowing the defendant Corporation to repudiate the policies and decline payment.

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - The insured owes a duty to disclose all material facts relating to the risk (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) . - False answers in the proposal form vitiate the contract of insurance (!) (!) (!) . - The insurer is entitled to repudiate the policies if the insured fails to disclose material facts regarding his health (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) .

What is the duty of the insured in insurance contracts based on the principle of uberrimae fides?

What are the consequences of false answers in the proposal form regarding material facts?

Under what circumstances is the insurer entitled to repudiate the insurance policies?


Judgment :-

1. The plaintiff-appellant is the widow of Neelakanta Pillai, who died on 2-4-1974 at the age of 33 years. He was a Local Fund Auditor in the service of the State of Tamilnadu. He had on 20-9-1973 made Ext. B7 proposal for insurance on his life for a sum of Rs. 1,75,000/- to the defendant, the Life Insurance Corporation of India. Since his salary was not commensurate with the premium payable, the defendant-Corporation accepted the proposal for insurance on his life for a sum of Rs. 40,000/-. On the same day as Ext. B7, his wife the plaintiff made another proposal Ext. B8 for insurance on his life for a sum of Rs. 1,35,000/-. This proposal was accepted by the defendant. In both the policies the plaintiff is the nominee to receive payment when the policies mature. On the death of Neelakanta Pillai, the plaintiff demanded payment of the amounts due under the two policies. The defendant repudiated the policies as obtained by fraud and on suppression of material facts relating to the life assured. Hence the plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of the amounts due under the two policies covered by the proposals Exts. B7 and B8, accepted by the defendant Corporation. The court below dismissed the suit finding that the policies were obtained without disclosing material facts regarding the health of the assured and hence the defendant was entitled to repudiate the contracts of insurance. It is against this that the plaintiff has come up in appeal.

2. Both the proposals Exts. B7 and B8 are accompanied by 'personal statements' signed by Neelakanta Pillai wherein the questionnaire relating to conditions of health is answered to show that he was of perfect health. The questionnaire takes in questions particularly relating to ailments if any that the person whose life is proposed to be assured had suffered in the past. As against the question as to whether he had at any time suffered fainting attacks, pain in the chest, breathlessness, palpitation, or any disease of the heart, the answer is 'no'. To the question as to what has been his usual state of health, his answer is 'good'. In answer to the question as to whether he had remained absent from work on grounds of health during the last two years, he has stated 'no'. The proposals Ext. B7 and B8 indicate a sound state of health of Neelakanta Pillai free from all ailments until the date of the, proposal. The medical officer of the defendant-Corporation had in Ext. B7 certified the life proposed for assurance as 'good', and he considers the life as first class. A similar certificate relating to Ext. B8 proposal is produced as Ext. B8 (a) certifying the life of the assured as First Class. Since however Neelakanta Pillai died shortly after the acceptance of the proposals and even before the premiums due for the second quarter were due, the defendant-Corporation made investigations relating to the state of health of the assured and found that he was suffering from heart ailment at the time when the proposals were made, his state of health and the history of the ailment were not disclosed and hence the contracts of insurance are vitiated by fraud and suppression of material facts. It has come out in evidence that Neelakanta Pillai was on leave due to heart ailment at the time when the proposals Exts. B7 and B8 were made. Exts. X2 and X3 are his leave applications and Ext.X4 is a medical certificate accompanying Ext. X3 produced by D.W.2 the Assistant Examiner of Local Fund Accounts Thirunelveli, on summons issued by Court. Exts. X2 and X3 applications for leave are in Tamil. Exts. B2(a) and B3(a) are the translations in English of Exts. X2 and X3. Ext. X2 is the application for earned leave for 120 days from 6-7-1973 to 2-11-1973. The reason for the leave applied for is that the applicant is suffering from weakness of the heart for the last two years for which he has to undergo medical treatment. Ext. X3 is the application for extension of leave for a further period of four months, fr



























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 Back to top