Delay of 69 days in filing the revision petition is condoned.

          Complainant/petitioner’s husband had taken a life insurance policy from the respondent for a sum of Rs.1 Lac on 26.02.1996.  Respondent accepted the premium on 27.02.1996.  Assured died on 29.02.1996, i.e., within two days of taking of the policy due to heart

-2-

attack.  The claim preferred by the petitioner being the nominee was repudiated by the respondent on the ground that at the time of filling in the proposal form, assured did not disclose that earlier he had taken three policies from the respondent which were lying in a lapsed condition due to non-payment of the premium.  Aggrieved by this, petitioner filed the complaint before the District Forum.

          District Forum allowed the complaint and directed the respondent to pay the complainant the sum assured along with bonus and other available benefits of the policies along with interest @ 8% p.a. w.e.f. the date of filing of the claim till realization.  Rs.5,000/- were awarded by way of costs.

          Respondent being aggrieved filed an appeal before the State Commission.  The State Commission accepted the fact that the assured was guilty of suppression of material facts in as much as he did not disclose while filling in the proposal form that he had taken three policies earlier, which were lying in the lapsed condition.  However, on the basis of concession made by the respondent insurance company, the State Commission directed the respondent

-3-

to pay the sum of Rs.50,000/- in addition to the paid-up value of the three policies of the deceased which were lying in the lapsed condition.

          Complainant being aggrieved has filed the present revision petition.

          We find no infirmity in the order passed by the State Commission.  Counsel for the petitioner has fairly conceded before us that the petitioner did not disclose the fact of his having three policies earlier which were lying in the lapsed condition due to non-payment of the premium.  Petitioner was guilty of suppression of material facts.  The State Commission has awarded the paid-up value of the three policies taken earlier and a sum of Rs.50,000/- ex-gratia on a concession made by the respondent.  No interference is called for in the impugned order.  Dismissed.