Date of filing :02.04.2019 Date of order :25.02.2026 MAHARASHTRA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,MUMBAI, BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

COMPLAINT CASE NO.: 16 OF 2019 Vinod s/o Digambar Pastapure, Complainant R/o Risala Bazar, Hingoli, (Adv.V.R.Jain)

Tq. & Dist. Hingoli.

VERSUS

1. The Assistant Director of Postal Respondent No.1to3 Services, India Post, Post Master General, (Adv. A.N.Patale)

Aurangabad Region, Aurangabad.

2. Superintendant of Post Office, Parbhani Division, Parbhani, 3. The Post Master (Grade-II)

Hingoli, MDG-431513.

CORAM : Milind.S.Sonawane, Hon’ble Presiding Member.

Nagesh C.Kumbre, Hon’ble Member.

J U D G M E N T

(Delivered on 25/02/2026)

Per Milind S.Sonawane, Hon’ble Presiding Member.

This is the complaint filed under S.17 of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 (‘C.P.Act’ for short).

2. The brief of facts of the complaint are that, the wife of the complainant namely Sanjivani Mallikarjun Kurle (hereinafter ‘insured’ for short) took the Postal Life Insurance from the opponents. The policy number was 0000000134358. The sum insured was Rs.20 Lakh. The nominee to the said policy was the complainant himself. Before the opponents issued the said policy the proposal form was filled in by the agent of the opponents namely Umesh Baliram Korde. The insured was referred to the panel doctor of the opponents namely R.J.Baswant. He examined her and after being satisfied, issued a medical certificate that the insured is medically fit and does not suffer from any serious illness. The risk of her life cover can be taken by the opponents.

3. The complainant further states that, after the issuance of the policy the insured paid the premium of Rs.8,300/- regularly. However, on 11.08.2016 the insured was not feeling well and was admitted in Mahesh Hospital, Hingoli. On 14.08.2016 she died in that hospital due to Acute Cardio Respiratory Arrest due to Hepatic Failure / Hepatic Coma due to Infective Hepatitis with Rheumatoid Arthritis. After her death the complainant lodged the insurance claim on 10.09.2016 with all the relevant documents to the opponents. On 09.12.2016 the opponents demanded some papers, which he also submitted. However, on 05.07.2018 the opponents repudiated his insurance claim on the ground that, there is suppression of information of the illness of Rheumatoid Arthritis of the insured since Aug. 2014. She was treated by Dr.G.P.Bangar. As per PLOI Rules, 2011 Para 39 and 53 suppression of material fact will lead to the repudiation of the policy. In fact, when the panel doctor of the opponents certified the insured to be medically fit and not suffering from any illnesses before the issuance of the policy, the ground of the repudiation of the insurance claim is not justified. It amounts to deficiency in service. As such, the complainant prayed that, the opponents may kindly be directed to pay his insurance claim of Rs.20 Lakh along with interest at the rest of 12 % p.a. They may also be kindly be directed to pay Rs.1 Lakh for mental and physical harassment and Rs.50,000/- as the costs of the proceedings.

4. So as to support the complaint the complainant has filed along with list the copy of proposal form, policy receipts, death certificate of the insured, communications made between them, repudiation letter, legal notice, medical certificate of Dr.Bangar, evidence affidavit.

5. The opponents appeared before our learned Predecessor Bench. After several opportunities given to them by that bench finally on 04.10.2019 they filed written argument (in fact our learned Predecessor Bench mentioned in the roznama that, it is written version) along with certain documents. As such, we are treating that, so called written argument as written version.

6. It is contended by the opponents that, the insured at the time of taking of the policy filled up the proposal form. In an answer to the question in column no. 12(d) of the proposal form, which asked as to whether she was suffering from any illness prior to that, she answered it in negati