SUNITA & 3 ORS Vs. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS BRANCH MANAGER, BRANCH GOHANA ,TEHSIL GOHANA SONEPAT HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioners Smt. Sunita & Ors. against the order dated 27.9.2012 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana (in short 'the State Commission') passed in First Appeal No.95 of 2007.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that life insurance policy was taken by the husband of the complainant No.1/petitioner No.1 for Rs.3,00,000/- as insured amount. The policy commenced from 28.08.2003. The insured died on 05.03.2004. As this was an early claim, Insurance Company appointed an investigator. The investigator reported that Deceased Life Assured (DLA) was consuming alcohol in high doses regularly, therefore, his liver was damaged and he expired. The claim was repudiated on the basis of the report of the investigator vide repudiation letter dated 05.03.2004 . The Insurance Company repudiated the claim mainly on two grounds. First that the DLA had taken medical leave on many occasions though in the proposal form he had given a clear "No" answer to the question whether the proposer was absent from his duty on account of medical reason during the five years. The second ground was that the investigator had found that the DLA was consuming alcohol heavily though in the concerned column of the proposal form he had given "No" answer. Thus, on the account of concealment of material information the claim was repudiated.

(3.) The complainants filed a consumer complaint bearing No.371 of 2005 before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Sonepat (in short 'the District Forum") and the complaint was resisted by the Insurance Company on the same grounds as mentioned in the repudiation letter. The District Forum vide its order 27.11.2006 allowed the complaint as under:-