The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by LIC challenging an order allowing an insurance claim. The Court held that the claimant's rural background and lack of literacy justified the nine-year delay, and no undisclosed ailments were proven to void the policy.
The writ petition was dismissed as it was deemed devoid of any merit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3487/2020
Life Insurance Corporation Of India, An Insurance Company Established By The Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956, Having Branch Address At Mandalgarh, Divisional Office Address Nagori Gardern, Bhilwara, Through Manager.
----Petitioner
Versus
Manhori Devi W/o Late Shree Krishnalal, By Caste Meghwal, Resident Of Kandukheda, Tehsil Lambi, District Muktasar (Punjab), Haal Saliwala, Tehsil Tibbi, District Hanumangarh.
----Respondent
| For Petitioner(s) | : Mr. Gopal Bose |
|---|---|
| Mr. Himanshu Solanki | |
| For Respondent(s) | : Mr. Mahender Singh Soni |
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Order
15/12/2022
The case is listed in the 'Orders' category on the application preferred for early hearing however, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is being heard and decided finally today itself.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The present writ petition has been filed against the order dated 28.11.2019 passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat, Hanumangarh.
The brief facts to be noted in the present case are that Late Shri Krishanlal, the husband of the respondent, took the Life Insurance Policy bearing no.50233606 dated 28.06.2008 from the petitioner and a permium of Rs. 9203/- (Rupees- Nine Thousand
(2 of 4) [CW-3487/2020]
Two Hundred and Three only) was paid. After getting the insurance policy on 28.06.2008, husband of the respondent Late Shri Krishanlal suffered a cardiac arrest on 10.10.2008 and he passed away. The respondent, in these circumstances preferred a claim application before the petitioner-Corporation on 08.04.2009. The petitioner after holding the investigation, rejected the claim of the respondent on 31.03.2010. The respondent thereafter preferred an application before the Permanent Lok Adalat, Hanumangarh against the non-payment of the insured sum by the petitioner on account of the death of her husband Late Shri Krishanlal. Learned Permanent Lok Adalat, Hanumangarh allowed the claim application of the respondent vide order dated 28.11.2019. Aggrieved of this order dated 28.11.2019, the present writ petition has been filed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently submitted that the husband of the respondent was suffering from certain ailments however, they were not disclosed while getting the insurance cover from the petitioner and thus, on the basis of the investigation report, the claim of the respondent was rightly rejected.
Secondly, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the application before the Permanent Lok Adalat, Hanumangarh has been filed in the year 2019 i.e. after a lapse of about 9 years of the death of her husband. He, therefore, submits that the application of the respondent before the Permanent Lok Adalat, Hanumangarh should have been dismissed on the ground of delay and latches.
He further submits that the Permanent Lok Adalat, Hanumangarh committed an error while allowing the application of
(3 of 4)
[CW-3487/2020]
the respondent vide order dated 28.11.2019 and, therefore, he prays that the writ petition may be allowed and the order dated 28.11.2019 may be quashed and set aside.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the husband of the respondent was insured with the petitioner and an insurance policy was issued in his favour without raising any objection. He submits that the husband of the respondent had passed away on account of cardiac arrest and was not suffering from any ailment which led to the death of her husband. He also submits that technical pleas/objections are raised just to deny the claim of the respondent. He submits that the respondent belongs to the lower starta of the society with a rural background, therefore, the delay caused in approaching the Permanent Lok Adalat, Hanumangarh had been rightly condoned and the claim was rightly adjudicated on merit by the Permanent Lok Adalat, Hanumangarh. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition may be dismissed.
I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and have gone through the relevant record of the case as well as the order impugned dated 28.11.2019 passed by Permanent Lok Adalat, Hanumangarh.
The undisputed fact in the matter is that the husband of the respondent was issued a policy covering the risk on 28.06.2008 after the premium of the said was paid. At the time of issuance of the policy, no objection/observation was made with respect to the Late Shri Krishanlal having suffered any illness and, therefore, it cannot be assumed and presumed at this stage that at the time of taking the policy from the petitioner, Late Shri Krishanlal had not disclosed the ailments from which he was suffering. It is an
(4 of 4)
[CW-3487/2020]
undisputed fact that Late Shri Krishanlal died because of the cardiac arrest and there is nothing on record which shows that Late Shri Krishanlal was suffering from certain illness which has led to his cardiac arrest on 10.10.2008. This Court has also taken note of the fact that the respondent, who is the wife of Late Shri Krishanlal is not literate and belongs to the lower starta of the society, living in a rural area. Therefore, the Permanent Lok Adalat, Hanumangarh had rightly taken into consideration the factors for approaching the Court after a delay of nine years and therefore, rightly adjudicated the claim of the respondent on merits without going into the matter of delay and latches in the present case. The claim of the respondent merits acceptance and the petitioner was under an obligation to compensate the same on the death of the husband of the respondent.
In view of the discussion made above, the order dated 28.11.2019 passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat, Hanumangarh does not require any interference.
The present writ petition is devoid of any force and the same is dismissed.
(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J
312-KashishS/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Permanent Lok Adalat erred in allowing the insurance claim despite the delay in filing the petition.
Whether the respondent is entitled to receive the insured sum on the death of the policyholder.
Life Insurance Corporation Of India
Manهوري Devi
Vinit Kumar Mathur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
