Complaint Nos.:

CC/20/05

Kalawati Sahu

Vs.

Branch Manager, Kotak Mahindra Life Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors.

Date of

Pronouncement:

09/10/2023

Dismissed

Page 1 of 8

AFR / NAFR

CHHATTISGARH STATE

CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION

PANDRI, RAIPUR

Date of Institution: 11/02/2020

Date of Final Hearing: 25/09/2023

Date of Pronouncement: 09/10/2023

Complaint Case No.- CC/20/05

IN THE MATTER OF :

Kalawati Sahu

W/o. Shri Balak Ram

All R/o. Vill. Pandavpara, P.S. Patna, Tah. Baikunthpur,

Dist. KORIYA (C.G.)

… Complainant.

Through: Shri P. K. Shukl, Advocate

Vs.

1. Manager,

Kotak Mahindra Life Insurance Co. Ltd.,

7^th Floor, Kotak Infinity Building No.21,

Infinity Park, Off Western Express Highway,

General A.K. Vaidya Marg, Malad (East),

MUMBAI – 400 097.

2. Manager

Kotal Mahindra Life Insurance Co. Ltd.,

2^nd Floor, Plot No.-12, G Block, BKC Bandra,

MUMBAI – 400 097.

3. Branch Manager,

Kotal Mahindra Life Insurance Co. Ltd., Surajpur,

P.O., Tah. & Dist. SURAJPUR (C.G.)

… Opposite Party Nos.1 to 3

Through: Shri D. Dutta & Shri G.V.K. Rao, Advocates

4. Mahindra & Mahindra Financial Service Ltd.,

Mahindra Towers, 4^th Floor, 570 P.B. Marg, Warli,

MUMBAI (M.S.) – 400 018

… Opposite Party No.4

Through: Shri M.L. Yadav, Advocate

5. Tiwari Motors,

Authorized Seller- Mahindra & Mahindra Motors

M.G. Road, Ambikapur,

SURGUJA – 497 001.

… Opposite Party No.5

Through: None appeared.

CORAM: -

HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAUTAM CHOURDIYA, PRESIDENT

HON’BLE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR VARMA, MEMBER

PRESENT IN BOTH CASES: -

Shri P.K. Shukl, Advocate for the complainant.

Shri GVK Rao, Advocate for opposite party Nos.1 to 3.

Shri M.L. Yadav, Advocate for the opposite party No.4.

None appeared for the opposite party No.5

Complaint Nos.:

CC/20/05

Kalawati Sahu

Vs.

Branch Manager, Kotak Mahindra Life Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors.

Date of

Pronouncement:

09/10/2023

Dismissed

Page 2 of 8

JUDGEMENT

PER: - JUSTICE GAUTAM CHOURDIYA, PRESIDENT

This complaint, under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986

(hereinafter referred to as “the Act” for short) has been filed by the

complainant alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties

on the ground that life insurance claim of her husband was repudiated and

seeking directions to the opposite parties for payment of total amount of

Rs.30,70,000/- (Thirty Lacs Seventy Thousand) jointly and severally on

different heads i.e. amount of insurance cover Rs.29,20,000/- (Twenty Nine

Lacs Twenty Thousand), compensation for mental harassment Rs.1,00,000/-

(One Lac) and Rs.50,000/- (Fifty Thousand) as cost of litigation.

2. Briefly stated the necessary facts of the case for its disposal are that the

husband of the complainant Late Shri Balak Ram during his lifetime

purchased a Mahindra truck for Rs.30,97,708.00 from opposite party No.5 on

31.12.2018 with the help of finance of Rs.29,20,000/- obtained from opposite

party No.4. The opposite party Nos.2 & 3 are the insurance companies who

provided life insurance cover to the owner of the vehicle for the financed

amount of Rs.29,20,000/- for the period between 31.12.2018 to 30.12.2019 vide

policy No.CR000020 (Load A/c. No.5927099) under Kotak Credit Term

Group Plan. As per the policy terms in the event of death of the policyholder

during subsistence of the policy the entire loan amount was to be deposited

by the opposite party Nos.1 to 3 insurance company. During subsistence of

the policy the policyholder husband of the complainant died on 13.05.2019.

Insurance claim was submitted before the opposite party No.3 along with all

necessary documents and opposite party No.4 was also intimated. But vide

letter 05.09.2019 the claim was repudiated by the opposite party No.1 on the

ground that on the date of issuance of policy 31.12.2018, Declaration of Good

Health (DOGH) was given by the policyholder, whereas he was

Click Here to Read the rest of this document