SHANTILATA MUKHERJEE Vs. L I C I

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is against an order of the District Forum, Burdwan disallowing a claim of Life Insurance Policy which was earlier repudiated by the Life Insurance Corporation of India. The complainant before the Forum was one Shantilata Mukherjee, a widow-nominee of her husband Ranjit Kumar Mukherjee who was the policyholder for an amount of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty-five thousand ). The complainant's case was that her husband had submitted a proposal for Life Insurance to the Branch Office of the Life Insurance Corporation of India at Burdwan on 15.2.86 which was accepted by the Corporation and a policy was duly issued. The relevant premia were all duly paid and the assured, an employee of the Railways, unfortunately expired on 3.10.86 due to cardio respiratory failure. The complainant-appellant as the nominee of her late husband preferred a claim for the payment of the assured sum but the L. I. C. I. after a long series of correspondence repudiated the claim on the ground that there was a material mis-statement in the proposal form. The learned District Forum after hearing both parties upheld the contention of the L. I. C. I. that the policy was vitiated by the relevant misstatement of fact and dismissed the claim. The complainant thereafter has filed this appeal challenging the correctness of the District Forum's order.

(2.) The Life Insurance Corporation of India, the contesting respondent before us has put forth the self-same arguments which were advanced before the District Forum. Their case is that in reply to specific question in the policy form, namely, "have you remained absent from place of your work on ground of health during the last five years ?" answered "no" which is a false statement.

(3.) The only point that calls for determination in this appeal is if the District Forum was correct in its finding and if not, if its order should be set aside. DECISION