Divisional Officer filed a consumer case on 17 Nov 2023 against S.A. Ramachandra in the StateCommission Consumer Court. The case no is A/2223/2017 and the judgment uploaded on 23 Nov 2023.
Date of Filing : 03.11.2017
Date of Disposal : 17.11.2023
BEFORE THE KARNATAKA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BENGALURU (PRINCIPAL BENCH)
DATED:17.11.2023
PRESENT
Mr K B SANGANNANAVAR : JUDICIAL MEMBER
Mrs DIVYASHREE M : LADY MEMBER
APPEAL No.2223/2017
1. The Divisional Officer
Life Insurance Corporation of India
Jeevan Prakash, P.B.No.37
Bannimantap
Mysore-570 015
2. The Branch Manager
M/s Life Insurance Corporation of India
Sakleshpura Branch
Sakleshpura
Appellants No.1 & 2,
Represented by The Manager (L & HPF)
LIC of India, DOI, J C Road
Bangalore-560 002
(By Mr Rajesh Shetty, Advocate) Appellants
-Versus-
1. Sri S A Ramachandra
S/o Sri Appannashetty
Aged about 52 years
2. Smt Shakunthala
W/o Sri S A Ramachandra
Aged about 52 years
Respondents No.1 & 2
R/at Shettihally Village
Nidigere (P), Hetturu Hobli
Sakleshpura Taluk
Hassan District-573 134
3. Smt S R Mamatha
W/o Sri Naveed D
Aged about 24 years
R/at Sri Laksmi Nivasa
2nd Main, 3rd Cross
Hemavathi Nagar
Opp :Yathindra Convent
Hassan-573 134 Respondents
:ORDER:
Mr JUSTICE HULUVADI G RAMESH : PRESIDENT
1. This Appeal is filed under Section 15 of Consumer Protection Act 1986 by the OPs, aggrieved by the Order dated 27.09.2017 passed in Consumer Complaint No.269/2016 on the file of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Hassan(hereinafter referred to as District Forum).
2. Heard the arguments of the Learned Counsels for the Appellants. Inspite of due service of Notice for appearance from this Commission on the Respondents, since none represented, hence their arguments is taken as heard.
3. The Complainants have raised a Consumer Complaint on 20.07.2016 before the District Forum, that their deceased son S R Shashidhar, on 04.08.2012 obtained a life Insurance Policy bearing No.725521335 with the Sum Assured being Rs.2,00,000/- from OPs; Complainant No.3, being nominee to the Insured in the said Policy and on 25.08.2016, he committed suicide leaving behind his Parents, Brother & Sister. Therefore, the Complainants submitted a Claim to the OPs with relevant documents, but, OPs repudiated the Claim on the ground that the Insured was suffering from headache, stress and chest pain since childhood and the said facts not disclosed in the Proposal Form. Hence, they seeks direction to the OPs, to pay the Assured sum of Rs.2,00,000/- with accrued interest and other reliefs. This case was contested by the OPs, stating that the said Policy had lapsed twice, which was revived later. While submitting the Proposal Form, the deceased insured had suppressed the above material facts & that he was under medication and by suppressing these information, the Insured obtained the Insurance Policy, hence, repudiated the Claim. The District Forum after enquiring into the matter, held that headache is not a disease and OPs cannot absolve themselves from their liability of paying the claim on the reason saying that the deceased S R Shashidhar has suppressed the material facts at the time of availing the Policy.
4. The Appellants in the Appeal Memorandum had taken a stand that the District Forum failed to consider Ex-P2 : UDR No.0010/2015 dated 26.08.2015 registered by the Yeslur Police, Hassan District, wherein, Complainant No.1 Sri S A Ramachandra, Father of the Life Assured/Deceased, himself had lodged the instant Complaint, admitting that “the life assured was suffering from mental illness and inspite of giving treatment at Hassan and Shimoga Hospitals, the illness was not cured and that the Life Assured committed suicide, as he was depressed on account of his feeling that his mental illness is not cured This has resulted in mis-carriage of justice”. The contention of the Appellants is that the Life Assured had committed suicide, as he was depressed that his mental illness is not cured and suppressed these material facts cannot be accepted, since insurer has to examine all the documents and to examine the prospective Insured before issuing the new Policy. The Insurance Company which repudiated the Claim of the Respondents/Complainants on the ground of suppression of material facts, is expected to prove the same for repudiation, by adducing cogent and acceptable evidence which they failed. In the circumstances, the finding recorded by the District Forum is proper and the same does not call for any interference. Accordingly, Dismiss the Appeal, with no Order as to costs.
5. The Statutory Deposit in this Appeal is directed to be transferred to the District Commission for further needful.
6. Send a copy of this Order to the District Commission, as well as to the parties concerned, immediately.
Lady Member Judicial Member President
*s
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
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.