AFR / NAFR CHHATTISGARH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION PANDRI, RAIPUR Date of Institution: 01/10/2024 Date of Final Hearing: 13/06/2025 Date of Pronouncement: 17/06/2025 APPEAL No.- FA/24/624 IN THE MATTER OF :

1. Branch Manager, SBI Life Insurance Co. Ltd., Main Road, Aamapara, Kanker (C.G.) – 494 334 … O.P. No.1 / Appellant No.1

2. Claim Department, SBI Life Insurance Co. Ltd., 2nd Floor, Ranjeet Tower, Plot No.8, M.P. Nagar, Bhopal Zone (RO) (M.P.) – 462 001 … O.P. No.2 / Appellant No.2 Through: E. Praveen Kumar, S/o. Shri E. Sathyanarayana Rao, HPC Head of SBI Life Insurance Both through: Shri Anshul Mishra, Advocate Vs.

Smt. Savitri Salam W/o. Late Shri Shravan Salam, R/o. Bazarpara, Surdongar, P.S. & Tah. Keshkal, Dist. Kondagaon (C.G.) … Complainant / Respondent Through: Shri B.M. Yadav, Advocate.

CORAM: -

HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAUTAM CHOURDIYA, PRESIDENT HON’BLE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR VARMA, MEMBER PRESENT: -

Shri Anshul Mishra, Advocate for the appellants.

Shri B.M. Yadav, Advocate for respondent.

O RDE R

PER: - JUSTICE GAUTAM CHOURDIYA, PRESIDENT This appeal is filed under section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act” for short) against order dated 14.08.2024 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kanker (C.G.) (hereinafter called “District Commission” for short) in complaint case No.CC/02/2024, whereby the complaint was allowed and the opposite parties/ appellants herein were directed to pay the amount of insurance claim of death of insured husband of the complainant/ respondent Rs.50,00,000/- (Fifty Lacs) along with simple interest @ 7% p.a. from the date of filing complaint 27.12.2023 within one month, failing which the interest was directed to be paid @ 9% p.a. The opposite parties/ appellants were further directed to deposit within one month penalty of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) in the Consumer Welfare Fund and to pay Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) to the complainant/ respondent towards compensation for mental agony and sufferings along with cost of litigation Rs.3,000/- (Three Thousand).

2. In nutshell the facts of the case, as stated in the complaint, are that the complainant/ respondent's husband Shravan Kumar Salam had taken two insurance policies No.5300488070707 and 45351802602, issued on 31/12/2015 and 03/09/2019 respectively, from opposite parties/ appellants insurance company, in which he had made his wife Smt. Savitri Salam the nominee. On 16/06/2021, the complainant/ respondent's husband died due to sudden worsening of health during the corona epidemic. Claim was made before the insurer opposite parties/ appellants under both the insurance policies, but insurance claim of insurance policy No.45351802602 was rejected saying that the life assured had concealed his diabetes disease, whereas the deceased life assured Shravan Kumar Salam died as he was tested corona positive. Deceased Shravan Kumar Salam had filled the proposal form on 28/12/2015, at that time he did not have any disease, he was completely healthy and after four years, he filled the proposal form for taking the second policy on 03/08/2019, at that time also he was healthy, he did not have any disease. The opposite parties/ appellants insurer paid the sum insured of policy No.53004880707 out of the insurance claim made by the complainant/ respondent, but when the insurance claim under policy No.45351802602 was not settled, the complainant/ respondent sent a legal notice through his advocate on 06/05/2022, to which the opposite parties/ appellants insurance company replied on 27/05/2022 and informed that the policy holder Shravan Kumar Salam was suffering from diabetes at the time of insurance and refused to pay the insurance claim. Hence, the complaint was filed before the District Commission seeking direction for the opposite parties/ appellants insurer to pay sum assured of Rs.50,00,000/- (Rupees Fifty Lakhs) along with interest and other reliefs from the opposite parties under the i