Before the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (constituted of Telangana, E u r n u d v e a r k a t h B e u C il o d n in su g m , K e h r a P i r r o a t t e h c a t b io a n d a A t c H t, y 2 d 0 e 1 ra 9 b ) ad FA NO.454O F 2018 AGAINSTC C NO.13 OF 2017 ON THE FILE OF DISTRICTC OMMISSION, KHAMMAM Between:

1) Exide Life Insurance Company Limited, The Manager, Kothagudem Town, Bhadradri-Kothagudemd istrict.

2) Exide Life Insurance Company Limited, The Manager, The Claims Review Committee, 1st Floor, Gold Hills, Square No.690, Houser Road, Negurhubli, Bangalore, Karnataka State - 560 068.

Appellants/Oppositep arties And Chimata Ramana @Ramanamma @InumulaR amana W/o Chimata Pullaiah, aged 50 years, Occupation : Coolie, R/o H.No.2-36, Singhabupalem, Kothagudem mandal, Khammam district.

..Respondent/Complainant Counsel for the Appellants Smt R.Aruna Counsel for the Respondent Sri M.Hari Babu CORAM ******

Hon'ble Sri Justice MSK Jaiswal President and Smt Meena Ramanathan Member Friday, the Second day of December Two Thousand Twenty Two ***

This is an appeal preferred by the Opposite parties aggrieved by the orders dated 24.04.2018 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Khammam in CC No. 13/2017 in allowing the complaint and directing the Opposite parties to pay Rs. 1,00,500/- towards insurance claim and Rs.1,00,000/- towards Rider sum assured, in total Rs.2,00,500/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of repudiation i.e., 31.12.2014 and further to pay Rs.2,000/- towards costs, to the Complainant, within a period of one month.

For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as arrayed

2)

in the complaint.

3) It is the case of Complainant that she is the wife of one Chimata Pullaiah, who obtained the policy bearing No.02976335 on 10.09.2014 from the Opposite parties by paying the premia of Rs.12,600/ for an assured sum of Rs.1,00,500/-, wherein, the Complainant was shown as nominee. On 01.10.2014, the policy holder got bitten by snake on his right leg ankle during agricultural operations, which was informied by the neighbouring land owner Gugulothu Veeraiah and thereafter he was shifted to Government Area Hospital, Kothagudem where the duty doctors attended him and informed that he died due to snake bite.

4) Immediately ^the Complainant made claim with the Opposite parties, who in turn, vide letter dated 31.12.2014 have repudiated the claim on the ground of suppressiono f material fact that the deceased life assured died due to Miliary Pulmonary Tuberculosis. Thereafter, ^the Complainant made application for reviewing the claim, which could not fructify. Hence, filed the complaint complaining deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite parties with a prayer to direct the Opposite parties ^to pay Rs. 1,00,500/- towards sum assured; Rs.1,00,000/-

towards accidental death benefit; to pay Rs.1,00,000/-towards other benefits, together with interest@ 12% per annum from the date of death of the life assured till payment and costs of the complaint.

5) Opposite parties filed their written version admitting issuance of the policy in question for an assured sum of Rs.1,00,500/-and rider sum of Rs.1,00,000/-for the duration of 44 years with paying term as 16 years. However, they contended that the complaint is barred by limitation and that the deceased life assured was suffering from Miliary Pulmonary Tuberculosis with COPD and severe breathlessness, for which, he took treatment prior to the date of proposal, which amounts to suppression of material fact. Hence, they repudiated the claim which cannot be termed as deficiency of service and hence prayed to dismiss the complaint with costs.

6) During the course of enquiry before the District Forum, in order to prove her case, the Complainant filed her affidavit evidence as PW1 and got marked the documents Ex.A1 to A9. On behalf of the Opposite parties, one Chidanand, their Manager-Legal filed his affidavit evidence as RW1 and got marked the documents Ex.B1 to B7.

7) The District Foru