Life Insurance Corporation of India vs DHOLI DEVI @ DHOLI BAI

THIS appeal under Section 15 of C.P. Act (the ''Act'') by the O.P. from the order of the District Forum, Udaipur, made in Complaint Case No. 191/1995 arises under the following circumstances.

SHRI Mangla Ram Meghwal, the deceased husband of Smt. Dholi Devi, complainant-respondent had obtained a life insurance policy for Rs. 50,000/- on 13.6.1990. The policy was to mature for payment on 28.2.2010 but the insured died of a head injury on 5.7.1993. His nominee namely, Smt. Dholi Devi respondent filed the claim with the appellant for payment of the sum assured along with other benefits under the said policy. The appellant repudiated her claim on the ground of suppression of material fact regarding his age, by the deceased insured. But on a complaint, having been filed before it by the respondent, the District Forum directed the appellant to pay to the respondent the assured sum with interest @ 18% p.a. from 5.10.1993 and cost at Rs. 200/- within a period of one month from the date of the order. The aggrieved appellant is now before us in this appeal. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.

It was no doubt urged before us by Mr. Dhingra, the learned Counsel for the appellant, that at the time of submitting his proposal on 1.2.1990, the deceased had declared his age as 39 years and at the time of his medical examination by appellant''s doctor on 5.2.1990 as 35 years, but in fact at that time he was aged about 55 years. In this behalf, Mr. Dhingra referred to the certificate of Secondary School Exam., 1991 showing the date of birth of Shri Champa Lal Meghwal son of the deceased assured as 16.8.1968, Voters List for Lok Sabha Elections 1993 showing the age of the deceased as 59 years, at S.No. 423, and the post-mortem examination report dated 5.7.1993 showing his age as 55 years. We have given due consideration to the evidence, our attention was invited to.

WE find that although the deceased assured is alleged to have declared his age as 39 years at the time of submitting the proposal form and at the time of his medical examination as 35 years but in the policy issued on 13.6.1990 the appellant had specifically mentioned the fact that the age of the deceased at 39 years was accepted by them. This admission made by the appellant in the policy issued on 13.6.1990 i.e. about 4 months after the declaration made by the deceased assured in the proposal form gets strengthened by the fact that appellant''s own doctor, after physical examination of the assured, had accepted the declaration of the deceased of his age as 35 years. This evidence outweighs the value of the evidence of the appellant referred to above which evidence was evidently based on other persons information given to the authorities concerned as it is not challenged that the deceased came from the illiterate or semi-literate background, being a member of Scheduled Caste. WE thus find no force in appellant''s contentions. Had we, we say for arguments sake only, found some force in appellant''s arguments and would have thought of setting aside or modifying the impugned order, particularly in respect of rate of interest, even then we would not have ordered refund of the decretal amount by the respondent to the appellant, looking to the aims and object of the Act and the advanced age of the old widow of the deceased insured. In the result the appeal is dismissed with cost on parties. Appeal dismissed.