STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
U.T., CHANDIGARH
Appeal No. | : | 16 of 2017 |
Date of Institution | : | 20.01.2017 |
Date of Decision | : | 01.02.2017 |
Harbans Kaul s/o Chuni Lal Kaul, R/o SCO 82-83, Second Floor, Sector 8-C, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh.
…Appellant
V e r s u s
1] Bharti Axa Life Insurance Co. Ltd., RO: Unit 601 & 602, 6th Floor, Raheja Titanium, Off Western Express Highway, Goregaon (E), Mumbai, through Sandeep Ghosh, Managing Director & CEO.
2] Regional Manager, Bharti Axa Life Insurance, SCO 208-209, Sector 34, Chandigarh.
...Respondents
Appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against order dated 02.12.2016 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, U.T.Chandigarh in Consumer Complaint No.104/2016..
Argued by: Mr.Jasjit Singh Saini, Advocate for the appellant.
BEFORE: JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH (RETD.), PRESIDENT MR.DEV RAJ, MEMBER
MRS. PADMA PANDEY, MEMBER
PER JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH (RETD.), PRESIDENT
Appellant/complainant has filed this appeal against order dated 02.12.2016 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II, U.T., Chandigarh (in short ‘the Forum’ only), partly allowing his complaint.
2. It is stated by Counsel for the appellant that the claim raised was wrongly declined as there was no evidence on record to show that when ‘Life Triple Health Protect’ Policy was obtained, the complainant was suffering from any pre-existing disease, which he failed to disclose in the proposal form.
It was noted as a matter of fact by the Forum that as per evidence on record, it was proved that when the Policy in question was obtained on 10.1.2013, in the proposal form, the appellant has failed to disclose the factum of pre-existing disease from which he was suffering i.e. Type-II Diabetes Mellitus and Pulmonary Tuberculosis for the last 5 years.
3. To know the correct facts, we have gone through the paper book of the complaint which is available with us. From the medical record of Family Physician’s Certificate/Treating Doctor Certificate dated 28.8.2014, we are satisfied that the appellant/complainant was suffering from above diseases when he took up the insurance policy. In the proposal form, it was found as a matter of fact by the Forum that the above said fact was not disclosed. In view of the above, to that extent, no case is made out for interference in the order under challenge. We feel that the Forum has done justice to the appellant/complainant by ordering refund of the amount paid, towards premium when policy was obtained. Thus, no case is made out to interfere in the order, under challenge.
4. For the reasons recorded above, the appeal, being devoid of merit, must fail, and the same is dismissed, at the preliminary stage, with no order as to costs. The order of the District Forum is upheld.
5. Certified copies of this order, be sent to the parties, free of charge.
6. The file be consigned to Record Room, after completion.
Pronounced.
01.02.2017
