-: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.7984 OF 2007 SBI Life Insurance Co. Ltd. : Petitioner V/s. Office of the Insurance Ombudsman (Maharashtra & Goa), Mumbai & Anr. : Respondents ... Mr.Bhalwal i/b. M/s.Vyas & Bhalwal for the petitioner. Mr.Rajiv Patil i/b. Mr.D.Purekar for respondent no.2. ... CORAM : S.A. BOBDE, J. DATE : JANUARY 29, 2008. ORAL ORDER 1. The petitioner has challenged the award of the Insurance Ombudsman (Maharahstra & Goa), Mumbai, directing it to settle the claim of the insured in favour of his widow. 2. The insured was one Anantkumar Kamble, who was covered by the SBI Life - Super Suraksha Home Loan Insurance Scheme under Master Policy no.83001000203, Account No.01593012301 from 28.9.2005 for a sum assured, which is equivalent to the outstanding loan amounting to Rs.3,44,000/-. -: 2 :- 3. The said Anantkumar Kamble died on 2.12.2005 due to Collagen Vascular disease with Myocarditis (Primary Cause). In the certificate, it was also mentioned that he had an old Pulmonary Tuberculosis (secondary cause). The petitioner rejected the claim of his widow. The widow, therefore, approached the office of the Insurance Ombudsman by a complaint dated 2.1.2007. The Ombudsman has directed the petitioner to settle the claim of the respondent no.2 by holding in effect, that the late Anantkumar Kamble did not suppress any information about his health which he was required to furnish. 4. Mr.Bhalwal, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that Anantkumar Kamble suppressed relevant information about his health which, if disclosed, would have rendered him disentitled to the policy. It is, therefore, necessary to examine the declaration which was given by Anantkumar Kamble: "Good Health Declaration: I declare that I am in sound health, do not have any physical defect/deformity, perform my routine activities independently and, that I have never suffered or have been suffering or have been hospitalized for any critical illness @ or a condition requiring medical treatment for a critical illness, as on date. @ Critical illness is defined as follows: The life to be insured should not: -: 3 :- i. have suffered or be suffering from cancer. ii. be taking treatment for heart disease, iii. have undergone/or have been advised medically to undergo chest and/or heart surgery within the following six months, iv. have irreversible kidney and/or irreversible liver failure, v. have suffered or be suffering from paralysis, vi. have undergone or been advised to undergo a major organ transplatation such as heart, lung, liver or kidney, vii. have suffered or be suffering from AIDS or veneral diseases. I hereby declare that above statements are true and complete in every respect and that I have not withheld or omitted to give any information that may influence my admission into the Group Insurance Scheme of SBI Life Insurance Co. Ltd. I hereby agree that this declaration shall form the basis of my admission into the Group Insurance Scheme and if any untrue averment to contained therein, I, my heirs, executors, administrators and assignees shall not be entitled to receive any benefits under the Group Insurance Scheme." 5. It appears to be true that the said Anantkumar Kamble had a history of T.B. from which he suffered sometime in the year 2003. This is evident from a certificate issued by the District T.B. Officer, Wardha, dated 25.2.2004 which shows that he was advised three months’ treatment with effect from 6.12.2003 to 29.2.2004. Significantly, the certificate also states that when he was examined on -: 4 :- 24.2.2004 for T.B., it was found that he had been "completely cured of the said disease" and, therefore, allowed to join his duties. It is, therefore, obvious that when the said Anantkumar Kamble gave his declaration to the petitioner on 28.2.2005 that he was not suffering from any critical illness and that he was in sound health, he could not be said to have submitted a false declaration. As observed, T.B. is not one of the illnesses defined as a critical illness by the petitioner itself and it is perfectly possible that the said Anantkumar was in sound health, since he was certified as completely having been cured of T.B. almost a year ago. 6. It is true that broadly construed, in ordinary usage, T.B. could be considered to be a critical illness. But, in this case, it would be highly inappropriate to consider the meaning of the term according to ordinary usage. The petitioner-Insurance Company has itself defined the term "critical illness" in the Good Health Declaration and the Court must, therefore, give the special meaning ascribed to the term. It is well-settled that words and expressions should be construed in the sense in which they are intended to be understood by the parties. 7. In this view of the matter, the decision of the -: 5 :- Ombudsman does not suffer from any error of law apparent on the face of the record or any other jurisdictional error. There is no merit in the petition which is hereby dismissed. The petitioner is directed to settle complete claim of the respondent no.2 within a period of four weeks from today. S.A. BOBDE, J.