SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(SCDRC) 1552

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
HDFC LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
RENU GARG – Respondent
SC/3/A/142/2024



Petitioner Advocates:MUNISH GUPTA ,Respondent Advocate:

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB, CHANDIGARH.

Date of institution : 06.03.2024 Reserved on : 04.02.2026 Date of Decision : 20.02.2026 HDFC Life Insurance Company Limited (Formerly HDFC Standard Life Insurance Company Limited) through its Manager/Authorized Person having its Branch Office at SCO No. 41, 3rd & 4th Floor, Feroze Gandhi Market, Ludhiana, Above Tanishq Showroom, Punjab-141001 Through Sh. Gurpreet Singh, aged 39 years son of Sh. Jujhar Singh, Tehsil Paonta Sahib, Shivpur, Sirmaur (HP), Deputy Manager-Legal, HDFC Life Insurance Company Limited, Corporate & Registered Office at 13th Floor, Lodha Excelus, Apollo Mills Compound, N.M.

Joshi Marg, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai 400 011.

…Appellant/Opposite Party No.2 Versus

1. Renu Garg widow of Sh. Suman Kumar, C/o M/s Garg Hardware Store, Main Road Bhai Himmat Singh Nagar, New Road Fatak, Opposite GNE College, Ludhiana.

Gauravsaggi78673@gmail.com, Mobile Number 99149-78673 .…Respondent No.1/Complainant

2. HDB Financial Services through its Branch Manager, having its Branch Office at B-21-4243/2, First Floor, Khasra No. 8057/802, 8058/802, Khata No. 436/1/551, Shimla Puri, Gali No. 2, Ludhiana –

141 003.

.…Respondent No.2/OP No.1 First Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the order dated 12.01.2024 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ludhiana in C.C. No. 540 of 2021.

Quorum:-

Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Daya Chaudhary, President Ms. Simarjot Kaur, Member Mr. Vishav Kant Garg, Member

1) Whether Reporters of the Newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes/No

2) To be referred to the Reporters or not? Yes/No 3) Whether judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No Present:-

For the appellant : Sh. Munish Gupta, Advocate (Through VC)

For respondent No.1 : Sh. Lokesh Vohra, Advocate For respondent No.2 : Sh. Svamin Sharma, Advocate for Sh. Vipul Dharmani, Advocate VISHAV KANT GARG, MEMBER :

Appellant/Opposite Party No.2 i.e. HDFC Life Insurance Company Limited, has filed the present Appeal through its Manager/Authorized Person to challenge the impugned order dated 12.01.2024 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ludhiana (in short, “the District Commission”), whereby the Complaint filed by the Respondent No.1/Complainant-Renu Garg had been partly allowed.

2. It would be apposite to mention here that hereinafter the parties will be referred, as were arrayed before the District Commission.

3. Briefly, the facts of the case as made out by the Respondent No.1/Complainant in the Complaint filed before the District Commission are that her Husband i.e. Suman Kumar was running the shop, namely, M/s Garg Hardware Store and had availed Loan of Rs.15,00,000/- in the year 2016 against property from OP No.1-HDB Financial Services. To secure the said loan, he had purchased HDFC Slic Credit Protect Plus Life Insurance Policy from OP No.2 i.e. HDFC Life Ins. Co. Ltd. with the purpose to protect his family from the burden of paying the loan in the event of his death by utilizing the Death Benefit amount provided under the insurance policy. The term of the said loan was five years and monthly premium was Rs.33,690/-. After sometime noticing good loan record of Suman Kumar, the official of OP No.1 had again approached him and had offered loan of Rs.25,00,000/-, which he had availed. When the Insured had availed new loan of Rs.25,00,000/- on 14.06.2018, at that time he had foreclosed his previous loan of Rs.15,00,000/-. Said loan of Rs.25,00,000/- had been secured by the Insured through purchasing Term Insurance having Death Benefit. He had paid a premium of Rs.29,884/- for 5 years term insurance having Death Benefit from 31.05.2018 to

30.05.2023.

4. Unfortunately, during the subsistence of second loan and Term Insurance Policy, Insured-Suman Kumar had died on 21.08.2020. The Complainant being the nominee had lodged the claim with the OPs, which was repudiated by the OP No.2 on the ground that the Insured Suman Kumar wa

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top