SBI LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD Vs. TARSEM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition under Sec. 21(B) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short, the 'Act') assails the order of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh (in short, 'State Commission') in Appeal No. 188 of 2016 dtd. 5/5/2016 arising out of order dtd. 29/1/2016 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ferozepur (in short, 'District Forum') in Complaint No. 365 of 2015.

(2.) The brief facts of the case, as stated by the petitioner, are that late Bachan Singh, father of the respondent, had taken a life insurance policy from the petitioner based on a proposal form dtd. 19/8/2013 for a sum of Rs.2,50,000.00. The date of birth entered in the proposal form was 1/1/1957 which made him 56 years old at the time of the commencement of the policy. The policy was issued and half yearly premium of Rs.12,500.00 duly paid. The said Bachan Singh died during the pendency of the policy on 29/10/2013. A claim for insurance was filed by the son (present respondent) of the late policy holder. The same was investigated as per Rules and on 1/8/2014 it was rejected by the petitioner on the ground that the Deceased Life Insured (DLA) had misrepresented his date of birth at the time of the policy. The proof of age submitted had been the Voter ID Card and as per the status downloaded from the official website of the Chief Electoral Officer, Punjab during investigation, the age of the DLA for the relevant ID card holder was stated as 88 years. The claim was, therefore, rejected on the ground that the policy was obtained on the basis of a fabricated voter ID card which rendered the contract of insurance void.

(3.) Aggrieved by the rejection of the claim, the respondent approached the District Forum seeking payment of the sum assured (Rs.2,50,000.00), Rs.50,000.00 as compensation for mental agony and Rs.11,000.00 as litigation expenses. The District Forum, after due opportunity to both parties to lead evidence and argue their case, allowed the complaint on 29/1/2016 and directed the opposite parties to pay Rs.2,50,000.00 along with interest at 9% per annum from the date of repudiation (1/8/2014) till realization apart from Rs.10,000.00 as compensation for mental harassment and Rs.5,000.00 as litigation expenses within 30 days. In addition, punitive damages of Rs.20,000.00 was imposed on the Head (Claims) of the petitioner insurance company for capricious and arbitrary exercise of power to be deposited with the Legal Aid Fund of the District Forum.