BEFORE THE TELANGANA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION : HYDERABAD.

FA.NO.229 OF 2020 AGAINST ORDERS IN CC.NO.124 OF 2017, DISTRICT CONSUMER COMMISSION-KARIMNAGAR Between:

1. M/s.SBI General Insurance Company Ltd., R/by its authorized Signatory, Opp: Collector Office, Bhagath Nagar, Karimnagar.

2. M/s.SBI General Insurance Company Ltd., R/by its authorized signatory, Natraj, 101, 201 & 301, Junction of Western Express Highway & Andheri – Kurla Road, Andheri (East), Mumbai – 400 069.

…..Appellants/Opposite Parties And Battu Sudhakar, S/o.Battu Gattaiah, Age 45 years, Occ: Business, R/o.H.No.10-2-705/2, Vidya Nagar, Karimnagar Town & Dist.

…..Respondent/Complainant Counsel for the Appellant/Opp.Party : M/s.S.Sravan Kumar Counsel for the Respondent/Complainant: Sri Srinivas Srikanth FA.NO.452 OF 2020 AGAINST ORDERS IN CC.NO.124 OF 2017, DISTRICT CONSUMER COMMISSION-KARIMNAGAR Between:

Battu Sudhakar, S/o.Battu Gattaiah, Age 48 years, Occ: Business, R/o.H.No.10-2-705/2, Vidya Nagar, Karimnagar Town & Dist.

…..Appellant/Complainant And

1. M/s.SBI General Insurance Company Ltd., Rep. by its authorized Signatory, Opp: Collector Office, Bhagathnagar, Karimnagar.

2. M/s.SBI General Insurance Company Ltd., R/by its authorized signatory, Natraj, 101, 201 & 301, Junction of Western Express Highway & Andheri – Kurla Road, Andheri (East), Mumbai – 400 069.

…..Respondents/Opp.Parties Counsel for the Appellant/Opp.Party : Sri Srinivas Srikanth Counsel for the Respondent/Complainant: Sri S.Sravan Kumar-R1&R2 QUORAM:

HON’BLE SMT.MEENA RAMANATHAN …. IN-CHARGE PRESIDENT &

HON’BLE SRI V.V.SESHUBABU …. MEMBER-JUDICIAL WEDNESDAY, THE 12^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND TWENTY FIVE *******

Order : (Per Smt.Meena Ramanathan, Hon’ble I/c President)

1. These are the appeals filed U/s.41 of Consumer Protection Act,2019 against the order dated 28.01.2020 on the file of District Consumer Commission, Karimnagar made in CC.No.124 of 2017. The Opposite Parties filed FA.No.229/2020 and the Complainant filed FA.No.452/2020. As both these appeals arise out of the same order, they are being disposed of by this common order.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are described as arrayed in the complaint.

3. Briefly stated, the facts are that – the Complainant’s son named Pranay Battu is an account holder in Opposite Party No.1 vide A/c.No.20264678601. He obtained General Personal Accident Insurance Policy vide Certificate No.39828621 from Opposite Party No.1 for a sum assured of Rs.20,00,000/-. The commencement of the policy was from 31.05.2016 to 30.05.2017. Unfortunately, the policy holder met with an accident on 01.08.2016 at Karimnagar and sustained severe injuries. The policy holder died on 10.08.2016 while undergoing treatment in Sai Krishna Super Speciality Hospital, Kachiguda, Hyderabad. An FIR was registered vide No.14/2016 and inquest was conducted. Post mortem examination was also conducted by Civil Asst.Surgeon, District Hospital, Karimnagar and submitted report stating that the cause of death as “death due to Intra Cerebral Bleeding secondary to Head Injury (RTA)”.

4. It is further submitted that after the death of the policy holder, the Complainant being the nominee approached the Opposite Parties with all relevant documents and made a claim for Personal Accident Insurance. But the Opposite Parties repudiated the claim on the ground that “the insured was under influence of alcohol at the time of accident and also stated that the same was established in Final Report.” In fact, there is no mention in the Final Report that “the insured was under influence of alcohol at the time of accident.” The repudiation of the claim of the Complainant is against the IRDA norms and M.V.Act and natural justice. Therefore, only to escape from their liability, the Opposite Parties repudiated the claim on flimsy grounds. Non-settlement of claim amounts to deficiency of service besides causing mental agony to the Complainant without any fault on his part. Hence, the Complai