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

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
REVIEW APPLICATION NO. 96 OF 2012
 
IN
RP/736/2012
1. GURPREET KAUR
...........Appellants(s)
Versus 
1. LIC OF INDIA
...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.M. MALIK, PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. SURESH CHANDRA, MEMBER

For the Appellant :NEMO
For the Respondent :NEMO

Dated : 10 Jul 2012
ORDER

We have perused the review petitions.  The petitioner had suppressed the material facts while obtaining the policies.  He gave different names in both cases.  He did not state that he was known as Sanjiv Singh Shergill alias Jasvir Singh.  He mentioned that he had nil previous policies.  This case is squarely covered by two authorities reported in Satwant Kaur Sandhu Vs. New India Assurance Company Ltd.  IV (2009) CPJ 8 (SC) and Dineshbhai Chandarana & another vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India, in first appeal No. 242 of 2006, decided by this Commission on 27.7.2010. 

Most importantly he should have given policy numbers while he obtained the second policy.  He should have specifically stated that he is known for two abovesaid names.

We see no force in the review petitions and therefore, the same are hereby

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top