Law: Insurance Ordinance, 2000

Section: XXXIX,118,122

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: XIII,3,4

(a)    Insurance Ordinance (XXXIX of 2000)--- ----S. 122---Insurance claim---Utmost good faith, doctrine of---Scope---Preinsurance ailment, assertion of---Medical examination of policy-holder not conducted by Insurance Company---Effect---It was the duty of insurance company (Appellant/Respondent) to conduct medical examination of policy holder prior to issuance of policy, who did not opt to do so, as evident in statement of an Executive Officer of Appellant being its witness (RW-1)---Appellant had no legal or moral justification to reject the death claim of policy holder---Appellant consecutively received two annual premiums of Rs. fifty thousand per year---Appellant had not investigated the health condition of policy holder within due time---Therefore, the Appellant could not approbate and reprobate by shifting the burden to policy holder in order to escape its liability---Thus , the Trial Court rightly appraised the evidence and decided the matter in favour of respondents / plaintiffs and no illegality, therefore, existed in the impugned judgment and decree calling for interference---Appeal filed by the Insurance Company, being merit-less, was dismissed. Mst.Nazeeran and others v. Ali Bux and others 2024 SCMR 1271 ref. (b)    Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)--- ----O. XIII, Rr. 3 & 4---Documents tendered (exhibited) by appellant s counsel--Scope---Pertinently, the documents should be produced in the evidence by the party itself and a fair opportunity should be given to the opposite party to cross-examine the same, therefore, documents produced by the appellant/defendant counsel in his statement could not be taken into consideration---Documents that have been tendered in evidence through counsel's statement cannot be considered---As per settled law disputed documents cannot be tendered in evidence in statement of the counsel for a party because such procedure deprives the opposing party to test the authenticity of those documents by exercising the right of cross-examination--Thus, all those documents brought on record in the statement of the counsel for the appellant were inconsequential. Mst. Hameeda Begum and others v.…