JAMNABEN SHAMBHUBHAI MANGE DIGVIJAYA Vs. MANAGER LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA ABHAY SHOPPING CENTER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed under section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the impugned order dated 29.04.2011, passed by the Gujarat State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (hereinafter referred to as 'the State Commission') in Appeal No. 1413/2008, "The Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Jamnaben Shambhubhai Mange" vide which, while allowing the appeal, the order dated 26.11.2008, passed by the District Forum, Jamnagar in consumer complaint No. 156/2008, filed by the present petitioner, allowing the said complaint, was set aside.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the younger son of the complainant, Jamnaben Shambhubhai Mange, named Hitesh, had taken two insurance policies, one for 5 lakh and the other for 2 lakh with numbers 813980826 and 813980628 respectively, for which the proposal form was filled on 203.2006 by Dipak Bhai Chandra, the authorised agent of the respondent/OP LIC. It is stated in the consumer complaint that the said younger son Hitesh was doing the business of cutlery and earning his livelihood by selling china items. The complainant stated that her son did not suffer from any previous illness before taking the policies and had not undergone any medical treatment. He, however, suffered from fever on 29.08.2006, following which, they consulted Dr. V.B. Mungra of Jamnagar. Dr. Mungra got certain diagnostic tests conducted on her son and referred him to Sri Ananda Bawa Kidney Dialysis Centre. He was also referred to GG Hospital for treatment. It is stated that the doctors diagnosed kidney related ailments and hence, the son of the complainant was subjected to dialysis and also given vaccine for jaundice. However, her son could not survive and died on 8.11.2006. The complainant filed claim with the respondent LIC under the policies in question, but they repudiated the same vide letter dated 01.03.2007, saying that while filling up the proposal form, the insured had not given correct information in response to various questions in the said form. The deceased had earlier taken treatment for pain in the abdomen and for renal disease, but these facts were not disclosed at the time of taking the policies. The consumer complaint was then filed, seeking directions to the respondent LIC to pay the claim of 7 lakhs under the policies, along with 12% interest and Rs. 50,000/- for deficiency in service and the litigation cost. The complaint was resisted by the OP, LIC by filing a reply before the District Forum, in which they stated that the contract of insurance was based on mutual trust between the parties and hence, for the failure to disclose correct information to the insurance company, the said contract was not valid. The OP LIC referred to a certificate given by Dr. Miten P Mehta in which, it is mentioned that he had history of chronic abdominal pain for the last one year. There was, therefore, no deficiency in service on the part of the OP in rejecting the claim.

(3.) The District Forum after considering the averments of the parties, allowed the consumer complaint and directed the OP LIC to pay a sum of 7 lakh under the two policies, along with interest @9% p.a. with effect from 1.02007. A sum of Rs. 2,000/- towards deficiency in service and 1500/- as cost of the complaint was also allowed. Being aggrieved against the said order, the OP LIC filed an appeal before the State Commission, which was allowed vide impugned order, stating that true facts about the health condition of the deceased were not stated in the proposal form. The order passed by the District Forum was set aside and the complaint was ordered to be dismissed. Being aggrieved against the said order, the complainant is before this Commission by way of the present revision petition.