TAHIRA BATOOL vs IGI LIFE INSURANCE Ss — 2026 CLD 699 INSURANCE-TRIBUNAL-LAHORE

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

TAHIRA BATOOL VS IGI LIFE INSURANCE Ss. 80 & 122---Death claim , denial of---Concealment of disease(s) of late policy holder, allegation of---Burden of proof---Scope---Evidence concurring allegation, absence of---Effect---Admittedly , the policy holder was issued a life insurance policy after approval from the concerned quarter, and the respondent/ company received two installments from the policy holder without any objection---The insurance policy was issued on 28.12.2020, while the policy holder died on 12.11.2022---On 03.03.2023, the insurance company was intimated about the death of the policy holder when the respondent /company issued repudiation letter on 03.05.2023 after lapse of more than 02 years from issuance of the policy---Denial to pay the death claim is violation of S. 80 of the Insurance Ordinance, 2000, because policy of life insurance effected after the commencement date shall not be called in question after the expiry of two years from the date, on which it was effected, and during said period the respondent / company did not take any action in relation to the health condition of the policy holder---During cross-examination of applicant, counsel for the respondent /company particularly, put suggestions to Claim Manager being its /Respondent's Witness (RW-1) that was it correct that policy holder was suffering from Hepatitis/C, this was denied by the RW-1 while applicant further confirmed that it was incorrect to suggest that the death of her father (policy holder) occurred due to hypertension, Hepatitis and smoking---In the circumstances, the respondent / company, was obliged to prove its allegations through solid and un-shattered evidence because when AW-1 denied the allegations levelled by the respondents/company, the onus to prove the allegations shifted on the respondent side, who could have also summoned the record of the hospital and could have produced other evidence in support of their allegations, but respondent failed to do so---Neither the record of the hospital nor doctor was summoned by the respondent / company---Merely, providing allegations in the pleadings have no status in the eye of law because pleadings of the parties are not substantive piece of evidence unless and until averments made in the pleadings are proved with convincing evidence in the court or are admitted by the other party---Pleadings are neither substantive evidence nor substitute of evidence---The death certificate which was produced (got exhibited ) by the applicant was a legal document and the presumption of truth is attached to the death certificate, which was never challenged by the respondent / company---Conduct of the respondent / company did not sent a healthy message to the applicant nor to the public at large by denying the payment of death claim to the applicant---Applicant succeeded to establish her claim with cogent evidence, while the respondent / company badly failed to prove its allegations---Insurance Tribunal decreed in favor of the applicant with costs along with liquidated damages---Insurance application, filed by nominee (daughter of deceased policy-holder), was allowed accordingly.

TAHIRA BATOOL vs IGI LIFE INSURANCE Ss — 2026 CLD 699 INSURANCE-TRIBUNAL-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 CLD