Bhopal (Madhya Pradesh): MP State Consumer Grievances Redressal Commission, Bhopal, has set aside an order of the District Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum, Hoshangabad and provided relief to the postal department stating that the respondent had suppressed facts of insurance.
As per the order, the district forum had directed the postal department to pay Rs 1 lakh with interest @ 9pc from January 27, 2013. The postal department had appealed in state consumer grievances redressal commission, Bhopal.
Advocate Rajiv Jain, who appeared on behalf of the postal department, argued that the insured Harishankar Battariya has suppressed facts. The insured had given answer in both columns 16 (c) and (d) as “No” in the insurance policy. This column was for personal history—during the last three years, have you ever consulted a medical practitioner for any ailment regarding treatment for a week or more or been admitted to any hospital or nursing home for general check-up, observation, treatment or operation?
While column 16(d) reads: have you remained absent from your place of work on health ground during the last three years? If yes, give full particulars.
Referring to a “leave certificate” issued by the deputy director of veterinary health services, Hoshangabad, dated July 31, 2010, advocate Jain said, “The insured Harishankar Battariya had taken medical leave on account of his ailment from June 21, 2010 to July 19, 2010, which is 29 days in total.
Rule 39 of Post Office Life Insurance Rules, 2011 reads wrong information furnished by any person or suppression of factual information by any person admitted to benefit from Post Office Life Insurance Fund/ Rural Post Office Life Insurance Fund, will at the discretion of the postmaster general, render null and void the contract concluded with that person and lead to the forfeiture of all payments made by him.
Advocate Rajiv Jain said, “The Supreme Court has already held that the contract of insurance including the contract of life insurance are contracts and every material fact must be disclosed otherwise. There is a good ground for rescission of the contract. If there is any misstatement or suppression of material fact the policy can be called into question.
