In a major victory for consumer rights, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has upheld an award directing Bharti AXA Life Insurance Co. Ltd. to pay a Rs 14.22 lakh death benefit to a widow, dismissing the insurer’s claims that her late husband hid a pre-existing cancer diagnosis.
Justice Jagmohan Bansal rejected the insurance company’s petition to overturn a Permanent Lok Adalat (PLA) decision, ruling that the insurer had utterly failed to prove its allegations of non-disclosure with reliable evidence.
A Sudden Tragedy and a Denied Claim
The legal battle trace back to March 23, 2018, when Samundar Singh purchased a life insurance policy from Bharti AXA Life Insurance. The policy carried a sum insured of Rs 7.11 lakh with a total death benefit of Rs 14.22 lakh. Singh paid an initial premium of Rs 63,172.
Just 25 days later, on April 25, 2018, Singh suffered a sudden, fatal heart attack.
Following his untimely demise, his widow filed a claim for the death benefit. However, on March 31, 2019, Bharti AXA officially repudiated the claim. The insurer alleged that Singh was diagnosed with squamous cell carcinoma (a form of cancer) in February 2017—more than a year before buying the policy—and had intentionally suppressed this life-threatening pre-existing condition on his proposal form.
Seeking justice, the widow approached the Permanent Lok Adalat, which ruled in her favor on April 2, 2025, and ordered the insurer to honor the claim. Bharti AXA subsequently appealed to the High Court to set aside the forum’s order.
Unsigned Photocopies and Mismatched Records
The High Court’s decision to uphold the award heavily rested on the poor quality of evidence presented by the insurance firm. Justice Bansal noted that the insurer’s entire case of “suppression of facts” fell apart under scrutiny.
During the proceedings, the court highlighted critical deficiencies in the insurer’s investigation report and the medical records they relied upon:
- No Official Verification: The scanned photocopy of the medical report presented by Bharti AXA did not carry the signature of any doctor.
- Lack of Attestation: The document was neither attested by a competent hospital authority nor authorized by any official from the insurance company itself.
- Inconsistent Records: The medical records displayed mismatched Central Register (CR) numbers, casting deep doubt on their authenticity.
Furthermore, the court pointed out a logical disconnect in the insurer’s argument: Singh’s cause of death was a sudden heart attack, and the company failed to establish any medical link between the alleged cancer and his actual cause of death.
The Legal Arguments
Advocate Jasmine Garg, representing Bharti AXA, argued that cancer is a life-threatening disease that went undetected during the routine medical examination because the deceased actively hid it in his proposal form.
Countering these claims, advocate Nikhil Vats, appearing for the widow, successfully argued that the burden of proof lay entirely on the insurer. Vats pointed to the glaring discrepancies in the scanned medical records and emphasized that an unsigned, unattested photocopy could not be used to deny a grieving widow her rightful claim.
Finding no factual or legal errors in the Permanent Lok Adalat’s original ruling, Justice Bansal dismissed Bharti AXA’s petition.
“Permanent Lok Adalat has recorded findings to the effect that the insurer failed to prove that the insured was suffering from cancer,” the High Court stated in its May 19 order. “In such circumstances, the impugned order cannot be disturbed.”
