AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PETITIONER was the opposite party before the District Forum on a complaint filed by the respondent, widow of the insured. Her claim under insurance policy was repudiated on the ground that the insured had concealed his illness before taking the policy. However, it has been recorded by the State Commission that insurance was accepted only after insured was thoroughly examined by the Doctor of the Insurance Company itself and moreover the reliance by the Insurance Company has been placed on the report of Dr. Parveen Nehar but it is recorded by the State Commision that neither there is any affidavit of Dr. Parveen Nehar nor any prescription slip has been produced for any treatment even by Dr. Parveen Nehar, State Commission, therefore, did not rely on the report that the insured, husband of the respondent, was suffering from any illness which is stated to be concealed. In the circumstances, we do not find any merit in this revision petition. It is dismissed. Revision Petition dismissed.