Life Insurance - Gbic.co.in

The complaint under all 3 policies was allowed. In view of technological advancements, LICwas advised to take IT initiatives for ascertaining position of previous policies on their own.Chennai Ombudsman CentreCase No. IO (CHN) / 21.01.2248 / 2004 - 05Smt. Uma AshokVs.Life Insurance Corporation of IndiaAward Dated 08.03.2005The complaint from Smt. Uma Ashok is against repudiation of claim for full sum assuredwith bonuses under 4 policies on the life of her husband Late S. Ashok for supprssion ofmaterial information in the proposals for insurance that the life assured was a knowndiabetic for 10 years and he was also a Chronic Alcoholic as per hospital records. LIC hadoffered to settle paid up value under the first 3 policies.A hearing was held. The complainant agreed that her husband was a diabetic and alcoholicbut there was no intention on the part of life assured to suppress any material informationwith intention to cheat LIC since her husband was never hospitalised and his blood sugarwas well under control. Insurer relied upon Certificate from hospital that the life assuredwas a diabetic / alcoholic prior to revival. Insurer stated that while taking the 4th policy ofinsurance, the life assured did not disclose about his previous lapsed policies and had thesame been disclosed, LIC would not have granted a fresh insurance at all.The records perused revealed that there was no evidenc other than the mortality summaryissued after death of the life assured stating that the life assured was an alcoholic /diabetic. The sugar readings were normal indicating that his diabetes was well undercontrol. Hence the repudiation decision under first 3 policies on ground of fraudulentsuppression was not held proved as per the stipulation of Section 45. so far as 4th policywas concerned, it was held that there was material suppession by non-disclosure of hisprevious policies, which were also in a lapsed condition.The complaint under first 3 policies for full sum assured plus bonuses allowed. Thecomplaint under the last policy was rejected by upholding of repudiation decision.Chennai Ombudsman CentreCase No. IO (CHN) / 21.07.2453 / 2004 - 05Smt. S. MalaVs.Life Insurance Corporation of IndiaAward Dated 08.03.2005Smt. S. Mala has represented to this Forum against repudiation of death claim under thepolicy on the life of her son Late S. Valathy and the offer of LIC to settle Rs. 25,000/- asEx-gratia sum against her claim for full sum assured of Rs. 50,000/- plus bonus andaccident benefit. The repudiation was on the ground that the life assured had physicaldeformity in his right hand which he did not disclose at the time of proposal for insurance.A hearing was held. Documentary evidence perused. The Insurer contended as per FIR andPolice Inquest Report, the life assured had deformity in his hand, resulting in his gettingdrowned in a river. Had the same been disclosed, LIC would have charged an extrapremium. The complainant contended that the Police in an attempt to shield illegal sandquarrying mafia closed the file of her son’s death as due to physical deformity. Actually herson died having been caught in a whirlpool formed due to gaping holes left in the riiverbeddue to indiscriminate sand mining. She stated that though her son had a stunted growth ofhis right hand, the same was not externally visible and he was carrying on all his dutieswith both his hands and was also employed in a local school as peon. She produced presscutting citing the hazards of illegal sand mining caused in the riverbed. Photographs of herson were also produced to vindicate the stand that her son had no physical deformity.