' SH. AZMAT SAEED, J.---RFA 447 of 2008 has arisen from an order dated 18-11-2008, whereby the learned Additional District Judge Lahore/Insurance Tribunal accepted respondent's application for recovery of policy proceeds holding the respondent entitled to receive policy proceeds from the appellants along with liquidated damages @ 5% higher than the base rate.
2. Precisely, the facts necessary for the adjudication of the lis at hand are that two life insurance policies were issued by the appellants in respect of Mst. Naseem Akhtar Chaudhri, hereinafter to be referred as "Assured", wife of respondent Javed lqbal. Apparently, the first policy was issued on 22- 7-1998 with the sum assured was Rs,1,25,000 while the second policy was issued on 1-8-2002 for an amount of Rs,2,50,000 The Assured Mst. Naseem Akhtar Chaudhri died on 30-4-2005 of renal failure. Respondent Javed lqbal allegedly after completing all legal/procedural formalities sought the payment of the Assured amount, which was declined by the appellants, whereafter. The respondent invoked the jurisdiction of the Insurance Tribunal. Application filed in this behalf was resisted by the appellant. The Tribunal seized of the lis framed as many as four issues and recorded evidence of the parties thereon, and vide the order impugned dated 18-11-2008, the Tribunal accepted respondent's application in the manner enumerated above.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants contends that the insurance policies in fact had lapsed, and therefore, no liability existed against the appellant/State Life Insurance Corporation. It was further asserted that deliberately material facts had been concealed regarding the health of Assured, as a consequence wherefore the insurance policy had been obtained fraudulently, therefore, the appellants were not liable. Adds that an application in terms of Order XVI, C.P.C. For summoning of additional witnesses and for production of record was incorrectly declined by the Tribunal to the prejudice of Lhe appellants.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent controverts the assertions being raised on behalf of the appellants by contending that they are estopped by section 80 of the Insurance Ordinance, 2000 to challenge the validity of the insurance policy after the lapse of two years of its insurance. Adds that no material information was concealed and that the insurance policy was valid therefore the appellants were liable.
5. Heard. Record perused. It is an admitted fact that insurance policies were issued in respect of Assured Mst. Naseem Akhtar Chaudhri who admittedly died. As far as question of the validity of the policies is concerned, apparently the same lapsed, but at some point of time these policies were revived. The appellants produced only one witness namely Saghir Ahmed R.W.1 the Senior Officer Assistant who during his cross-examination in unequivocal terms had deposed that the policies in question commenced on 22-7-1988 and 1-8-2002 respectively and further stated that those policies were in force at the time of the death of the Assured. In view of said admission the question of the validity of the policies stood settled in favour of the respondent.
6. Adverting now the contentions that the insurance policies were invalid or un-enforceable on account of withholding or concealing any material information qua the health of the Assured and thereby the policies in dispute were procured fraudulently. In this particular context, suffice it to say that there is no evidence on record to substantiate the aforesaid assertion. R.W.1 in his cross- examination categorically stated that investigation was conducted by one Shabbir Hussain, District Manager Rawalpindi who was never produced in evidence. R.W.1 denied any personal knowledge regarding the Assured. The only material with reference to Assured to be produced are Mark R1 and R2 which are purportedly prescription slips of Dr. Mumtaz Ahmad and discharge summary of Anwar Hospital. The authors of said documents were never produced in evidence to prove the genuineness of the said documents, hence, those pieces of paper were never exhibited and rightly not read in evidence.
7. With reference to the aforesaid documents an application under Order XVI, C.P.C. Was filed in an attempt to produce Dr. Mumtaz Ahmed and Dr. C. M Anwar. Said application was apparently filed on 22-1-2008 which was contested whereafter the counsel representing the appellants in terms of his statement before the Tribunal on 28-3-2008 closed appellants' evidence. Hence, the appellants are estopped from raising any grievances as regards the application under Order XVI, C.P.C. Which was eventually dismissed too. In this behalf it may also be added that the purpose of producing two witnesses whose names were not mentioned in the list of witnesses was to prove R1 and R2 which pertained to the post insurance period as was frankly conceded by R.W.1 in his cross examination. Obviously said documents are not relevant and have no bearing on the case, as the subsequent illness if any of the Assured after the insurance policy had been issued is no legal consequence and by no stretch of the imagination can be relied upon to assert or prove that such illness existed prior to the issuance of the insurance policy. The Assured cannot be accused of not disclosing any illness had occurred after the insurance policy was taken out. Thus, it is clear and obvious that the appellants have been unable to prove: on record that there was any failure to disclose any material fact qua the health of Assured at the time of the insurance policy was issued.
8. The upshot of the above discussion is that no illegality and ambiguity could be identified by the learned counsel for the appellants in the order impugned, and the same being unexceptionable is not open for any interference by this Court. Findings arrived at and the conclusion drawn by the Tribunal are based on objective scrutiny and fair analysis of evidence on record with application of mind. Consequently, this appeal being devoid of any merit stands dismissed accordingly.
' Requisitioned record be sent back to the court concerned.