FIRST ADDITIONAL BENCH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB, CHANDIGARH

1.

First Appeal No.607 of 2022 Date of Institution : 19.07.2022 Date of Reserve : 28.10.2025 Date of Decision : 05.12.2025 PNB MetLife India Insurance Company having its registered office at Unit No.701, 702, 703, 7^th Floor, West Wing 26/27, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Bengaluru-560001 serving through its Branch Office situated at Eminent Mall, Kennedy Avenue, Mall Road, Amritsar through its Branch Manager.

….Appellant/Opposite party Versus Harbir Singh Sareen son of Late Tejinder Singh Sareen resident of House No.108, Lawrence Road, Amritsar.

…..Respondent/Complainant

2.

First Appeal No.668 of 2022 Date of Institution : 05.08.2022 Date of Reserve : 28.10.2025 Date of Decision : 05.12.2025 PNB MetLife India Insurance Company having its registered office at Unit No.701, 702, 703, 7^th Floor, West Wing 26/27, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Bengaluru-560001 serving through its Branch Office situated at Eminent Mall, Kennedy Avenue, Mall Road, Amritsar through its Branch Manager.

….Appellant/Opposite party Versus Ramneek Kaur Sareen wife of Late Tejinder Singh Sareen, resident of House No.108, Lawrence Road, Amritsar 98551-46511.

…..Respondent/Complainant First Appeals under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the order dated 18.01.2022 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Amritsar Quorum:-

Mr.Harinderpal Singh Mahal, Presiding Judicial Member Mrs. Kiran Sibal, Member Present (F.A.No.607 of 2022):-

For the appellant : Sh.Sanjeev Goyal, Advocate For the respondent : Sh.Umesh Aggarwal, Advocate HARINDERPAL SINGH MAHAL, PRESIDING JUDICIAL MEMBER This order will dispose of the above noted two appeals, which have been preferred by different appellants/opposite parties against the orders dated 18.01.2022 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Amritsar, whereby the complaint filed by the respondent/complainant, under Section 11/12 of the Consumer Protection Act (in short ‘the Act’), was allowed and opposite party was directed to pay the sum assured of policy No.21869026 of Rs.15,00,000/- by deducting the amount of Rs.4,01,442.97p as already released in favour of the complainant i.e. Rs.10,98,557.03p along with interest @6% p.a. on the awarded amount from the date of filing of the complaint till realization. They were further directed to pay litigation expenses of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant.

2. Facts are taken from F.A. No.607 of 2022. It would be apposite to mention that hereinafter the parties will be referred, as have been arrayed before the District Commission.

3. Summarily the facts of the case are that the father of the complainant namely Tejinder Singh Sareen got himself insured, vide policy No.21869026 dated 31.03.2016 for a term of 41 years with annual premium of Rs.1,50,000/-. The policy was issued after due medical conducted by the team of doctors of the opposite party. Sh.Tejinder Singh Sareen expired on 08.07.2018 and being the nominee, the complainant moved a claim letter with the branch office of the opposite party at Amritsar on 26.07.2018 by providing all the requisite documents including the original policy document. However, the opposite party instead of releasing the actual claim with benefits/bonus to the complainant had repudiated the claim, vide letter dated 31.08.2018 of the complainant by mere releasing an amount of Rs.4,01,442.97p which is equal to the premium paid by the DLA. The claim was repudiated on the ground of ‘non- disclosure of medical condition by the father of the complainant while taking the policy, whereas the doctors of the opposite party themselves conducted the medical. On approaching for release of claim by the complainant, he was told that investigation of the case is being made and soon the claim of this policy shall be released. However, the complainant received a letter dated 31.08.2018 from the opposite party repudiating the claim of the complainant on flimsy ground of n