The rejection of the claim on the ground that there was concealment of certain material facts by the appellant at the time of purchase of policy, was not found to be tenable and the insurance company was directed to reimburse the expenses incurred for the period from 07.07.2007 to 06.07.2009. The aforesaid amount was paid by the insurance company. The order passed by the National Commission was not challenged any further by the Insurance Company. From this, it is established that even the Insurance Company accepted the fact that non-mentioning of the disease from which the deceased wife of the appellant suffered at the time of purchasing the policy was not material, as the death was caused from a different disease all together. Both had no relation with each other. Now, the insurance company cannot be permitted to raise same plea to deny renewal of insurance policy to the appellant for the period from 07.07.2009 onwards. Even though direction was given by the District Forum vide order dated 11.09.2009 to renew the policy further but it was not renewed, till such time interim order was passed by the National Commission on 13.05.2011.
Further the impugned order was passed by the National Commission on 26.11.2018, whereby direction for renewal of policies was set aside. The amount of premium charged by the insurance company for renewal of policies has not been refunded. Meaning thereby the premium for renewal of the policies for the period in dispute stands paid.
SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT
Citation: 2023 STPL(WEB) 42 SC
OM PRAKASH AHUJA Vs. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. ETC.
Civil appeal nos. 2769-2770 of 2023-Decided on 4-7-2023
Click to See Full Text of Judgment: 2023 STPL(WEB) 42 SC
