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

2024 Supreme(Telangana) 49

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
SUREPALLI NANDA, J.
Cheemala Nagendra Babu – Petitioner
Versus
SBI Life Insurance Company Limited and Another – Respondents
W.P. No. 42237 of 2022
Decided On : 26-02-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Ramesh Bura.
For the Respondent: Srinivas Karra.

IMPORTANT POINT
The judgment established the importance of materiality, fraudulent intent, and knowledge of the policy-holder in cases of misstatement or suppression of facts in relation to insurance claims.

Headnote:

Suppression of Material Fact - Insurance Claim - Insurance Act, Section 45 - The court discussed the applicability of Section 45 of the Insurance Act, which restricts the repudiation of a life insurance policy on the ground of misstatement or suppression of facts. The court emphasized the need for materiality, fraudulent intent, and knowledge of the policy-holder in such cases. The judgment highlighted the importance of a reasonable interpretation of the clause and the burden of proof on the insurer.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought a writ order to declare the repudiation of an insurance death claim as illegal and arbitrary. The respondents had repudiated the claim based on the deceased's alleged suppression of material facts regarding a previous life insurance policy.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the deceased had answered 'yes' to a specific query in the proposal form but had not disclosed details of another life insurance policy held by him. The court opined that the deceased had not suppressed material facts and that the order impugned was passed mechanically without assigning any reasons.

Issues: The issues revolved around the alleged suppression of material facts by the deceased, the applicability of Section 45 of the Insurance Act, and the validity of the repudiation of the insurance claim.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for materiality, fraudulent intent, and knowledge of the policy-holder in cases of misstatement or suppression of facts. It highlighted the importance of a reasonable interpretation of the clause and the burden of proof on the insurer.

Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, the impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remitted back to the respondents to reconsider the petitioner's claim in accordance with principles of natural justice.

ORDER :

1. Heard Mr.Ramesh Bura, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Mr. Srinivas Karra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.

2. PRAYER:

    Petitioner approached the Court seeking prayer as under:

“To issue Writ order or direction more in the nature of Mandamus declaring the impugned Ref: 4334212/OPS/22-23/CL/R/93941 Dated:04/07/2022 issued by Respondents, repudiating the insurance death claim, under the Policy No. 1G401794406 on the life of Late Cheemala Ramaswamy under plan UIN: 111N089V03, on the ground of ‘suppression of material fact’ is illegal, arbitrary and violation of Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution of India and consequently set aside the impugned Ref: 4334212/OPS/22-23/CL/R/93941 Dated: 04.07.2022 issued by Respondents and direct the Respondents to release the insurance claim to the petitioner with simple interest at the rate of 18 percent per annum in the interest of justice.”

3. PERUSED THE RECORD:

    The order impugned dated 04.07.2022 issued by the Respondents vide Ref. 4334212/OPS/22-23/CL/R/ 93941, reads as under:

“This is with reference to your claim under the policy no. 1G401794406 on the life of Late Cheemala Ramaswamy. We are sad to note the unfortunate demise of Late Cheemala Ramaswamy.

On scrutiny of claim documents, we have noted that in the proposal for insurance dated 19.10.2019, Late Cheemala Ramaswamy had answered the questions in the proposal form as follows:

Do you have any other individual life insurance policy (from SBI Life or any other life insurer) or have you applied for one?

Yes

Name of Insurance Company

Policy/

Proposal

Year of Issue

Product/Plan/

Rider/Option

Medical (Y/N)

Yearly Premium (Rs.)

Sum Assured (Rs.)

Self/Spouse/Parent (Pls. Specify)

Policy Status

ICICI PRUDENTIAL

44130995

2019

ICICI Pru Improtect smart

Y

20233

Rs. 10000000

Self

In Force

    But Late Cheemala Ramaswamy had not disclosed details of Policy availed from Exide Life Insurance Company in 2018.

Life insurance contract is a contract of utmost good faith. This policy was issued on the basis of the information disclosed in the proposal form believing the information to be true. However, we have sufficient evidence to prove that Late Cheemala Ramaswamy had not disclosed details of other Life insurance policy held by him at the time of submission of the proposal form.

As these material facts were not disclosed in the proposal form, the claim is hereby repudiated on the grounds of suppression of material facts.

Please note that an amount of Rs. 54720/- (Fifty Four Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Only) has been transferred to your saving account no. ***4063 held in State Bank of India, NRI Branch Khammam branch, on 29/06/2022, as per terms and conditions of the policy.

In case, you are not satisfied with the above decision and feel that we have not considered any particular facts and circumstances in support of your claim, you may send your representation for re-consideration of your claim to our Claims Review Committee, situated at the following address:

Head Claims, SBI Life Insurance Co. Ltd. 8th Level, Seawoods Grand Central, Tower 2, Plot No. R-1, Sector-40, Seawoods, Nerul Node, Navi Mumbai-400706.

The decision taken by the Committee would be communicated to you.

Thanking You,

Yours sincerely,

AVP: Claims, SBI Life Insurance Company Ltd.

Ph: 022-66456509, Claims@sbilife.co.in

This is a system generated letter and does not require any signature.”

4. Counter affidavit filed by the Respondents, in particular, Paras 4 to 10 read as under:

    “4. It is submitted that the Deceased Life Assured, Mr. Cheemala Ramaswamy (hereinafter referred to as the “DLA”) had applied for SBI Life-E Shield-Level Term vide proposal bearing No. 1GPZ073593 dated 19/10/2019. A copy of the proposal form is appended as ANNEXURE-A. That in reply to the question in the proposal form,

                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