Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
DEEPAK GUPTA
Usha Chopra – Appellant
Versus
LIC – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Deepak Gupta, J.
This Regular Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 16.12.1995 passed by the first Appellate Court of learned Additional District Judge, Ludhiana, whereby the insurer's appeal was allowed and the suit for recovery of the assured sum under a life insurance policy filed by plaintiffs (appellants herein) was dismissed, reversing the trial Court's decree dated 03.05.1993 in favour of the plaintiff-nominee.
2. Factual Matrix: The undisputed facts, which emerge on perusal of the file are that Sh. Rajinder Kumar Chopra, husband of plaintiff Smt. Usha Chopra got his life insured with defendant respondent - life insurance Corporation of India for a sum of Rs. 25,000/- on 19.09.1985 by submitting proposal form Ex.DW6/1. He expired on 26.04.1987 i.e. about one year and seven months after the policy date. The nominee Smt. Usha Chopra i.e. wife of deceased along with her children filed a claim for the sum assured by the insurer. However, the said claim was repudiated by insurance company on the ground that the deceased had made mis-representation in the proposal for the life insurance. Said defence of the respondent- Life Insurance Corporation o
Insurers have the right to repudiate life insurance policies for suppression of material facts, emphasizing the duty of utmost good faith in insurance contracts.
(1) The “Three-Year Rule” (Section 45) – Under the amended Section 45, a policy cannot be questioned after three years from issuance or risk commencement on any ground.(2) Agent’s Responsibility – Th....
Insurers cannot reject claims on trivial grounds or without substantial evidence of pre-existing conditions, as it violates the insured's fundamental rights and undermines the principles of good fait....
Revival of Policy - It is settled proposition of law that when the policy has been revived, it revives from the date when it was originally issued.
Insurers must comply with statutory obligations of disclosure; failure to do so prevents repudiation of claims based on misrepresentations in policy applications.
(1) Full Knowledge – DLA had the full knowledge of pre-existing ailments at the time of filling the proposal form and there was a nexus with preexisting disease and the cause(s) of death.(2) Proposal....
The insured's obligation to disclose health status is limited to knowledge of such conditions, and unsubstantiated claims of suppression cannot invalidate a life insurance policy.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
