NCDRC

NCDRC

FA/797/2021

PREM RAJ GUPTA - Complainant(s)

Versus

BRANCH MANAGER, HDFC LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED & ANR. - Opp.Party(s)

MR. NARENDRA KUMAR SHARMA

20 Jul 2023

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
FIRST APPEAL NO. 797 OF 2021
(Against the Order dated 18/08/2021 in Complaint No. 113/2019 of the State Commission Rajasthan)
1. PREM RAJ GUPTA
S/O SHRI RADHESHYAM GUPTA R/O 141, VIVEK VIHAR, NEW SANGANER ROAD,JAIPUR-302019
...........Appellant(s)
Versus 
1. BRANCH MANAGER, HDFC LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED & ANR.
HDFC LIFE INSURANCE CO.LTD. BRANCE OFFICE, FIRST FLOOR, LAND MARK TOWER, PLOT NO. S-16-A, MAHAVEER MARG, C-SCHEME,JAIPUR-302003
2. CORPORATE MANAGER
HDFC LIFE INSURANCE CO.LTD., CORPORATE OFFICE, 12TH AND 13TH FLOOR,LODHA EXCELUS,NM JOSHI MARG, MAHALAKSHMI MUMBAI-400011
...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAM SURAT RAM MAURYA,PRESIDING MEMBER

FOR THE APPELLANT :
MR. NARENDRA KUMAR SHARMA, ADVOCATE
FOR THE RESPONDENT :
MS. LIVYA P. LALU, ADVOCATE FOR
MR. JOYDIP BHATTACHARYA, ADVOCATE

Dated : 20 July 2023
ORDER

1.      Heard counsel for the parties. 

2.      The above appeal has been filed against the order of State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajasthan at Jaipur dated 18.08.2021 whereby the consumer complaint No.113/2019 has been dismissed.

3.      The appellant filed consumer complaint No.113/2019 claiming the benefit under Insurance Policy No.18365171 dated 15.04.2026 issued in the name of Smt. Bhavna Gupta, wife of the appellant.  In substance, the appellant has stated that Smt. Bhavna Gupta has obtained the above policy for a period of 30 years.  During the delivery, complications arose and Smt. Bhavna Gupta died on 19.09.2018.  The complainant was nominee in the aforesaid policy. The complainant set up claim under the policy, which was rejected by the Insurance Company by the letter dated 30.10.2018 on the ground that while obtaining the policy Smt. Bhavna Gupta has concealed the previous policy i.e. Policy No.0325025464 issued on 30.09.2015 from Bajaj Life Insurance Company.

4.      The fact of obtaining the Policy No.0325025464 dated 30.09.2015 has not been disputed by the appellant.  The appellant took plea that the proposal form was filled up by the insurance agent and it was a long form and it was not possible for Late Smt. Bhavna Gupta to verify all the facts. Smt. Bhavna Gupta has supplied all the information as required by the insurance agent.  If any mistake has been committed, then Smt. Bhavna Gupta could not be responsible for it nor the appellant is responsible for it.

5.      I have considered the argument of the counsel for the parties.  The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has relied upon the judgment of Reliance Insurance Co. Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Rekhaben Nareshbhai Rathod,, AIR 2019 SC 2039. In this, it has been clearly held by the Supreme Court that once the proposal form has been signed by the Life Assured then, he cannot say that the fact mentioned in the proposal form was not in his knowledge.  In the proposal form, the relevant query has been answered as “no”.  Although on the date of signing the proposal form i.e. on 30.01.2016, Policy No. 0325025464 was very much in existence, which was issued on 30.09.2015. Thus, the finding of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission as well as the Insurer relating to concealment of fact do not suffer from any illegality.  The appeal has no merit.  It is dismissed.

 
..................................................J
RAM SURAT RAM MAURYA
PRESIDING MEMBER

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.