PARMINDER KAUR Vs. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed by the complainants (to be referred as 'complainants') against the judgment dated 28.11.2001 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bathinda (in short 'District Forum').

(2.) BALWINDER Singh, husband of Parminder Kaur and father of Jiwan Jyot, complainants got life insurance policy on 28.5.1998. The date of maturity of the insurance policy was 28.5.2018. The insured died of heart failure on 9.4.1999 at about 10.00 a.m. in Village Maisar Khana. The complainants, being the widow and daughter of Balwinder Singh, insured, lodged a claim but it was repudiated by the respondents (to be referred as 'respondents'), Hence, the complainant filed a complaint for recovery of the amount of the insurance policy with compensation, interest and costs.

(3.) THE respondents filed written statement and contested the case. Legal objections were pleaded that the complaint was not maintainable; the complainants were not consumers; the complainants have not disclosed the true and material facts; the complainants have no locus standi or cause of action to file the present complaint; the complainants are estopped by their own act, conduct and acquiescence from filing the present complaint. It was pleaded that Balwinder Singh, insured had concealed material facts before getting the life insurance policy. He had failed to disclose that he was got operated for transplantation of kidney from PGI, Chandigarh prior to the taking of the policy. This fact was intentionally kept concealed by him. During the inquiry conducted by the respondents, even Balbir Kaur, mother of Balwinder Singh and Darshan Singh, neighbour of Balwinder Singh, had made statement to that effect (part of Ex. R -2). The Inquiry Officer gave his inquiry report dated 29.10.1999. As per the Inquiry Report, the cause of death was failure of transplanted kidney. The complainants had given a wrong cause of death in the claim petition. During the course of investigation, it has come to light that the assured had got treatment from P.G.I., Chandigarh for transplantation of kidney in the year 1997 and in Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi and Civil Hospital, Amritsar. The respondents had demanded necessary record from the complainants but they failed to respond. Therefore, the complainants failed to co -operate with the appellants for the adjudication of their claim with ulterior motive. Moreover, the life assured had died within one year of the insurance policy and it being an early claim was liable to be repudiated. Hence dismissal of complaint was prayed.