State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Chandrakala D C vs Branch Manaer on 14 January, 2026
Appeal filed on: O9-O8-2O24
Appeal disposed on: 14-0l-2026
BEFORE THE KARNATAXA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION, BANGALORE. (ADDL. BENCH}
DATED THIS THE l4th DAY OF JANUARY,20.26
CORAM: HoN'BLE sRr.RAvI SHANKA& JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE SMT. SUNITA C.BAGEWADI, LADY EMBER
APPEAL No.235412024
Chandrakala.D.C,
Aged 49 years,
W/o late J.Raju,
No.2, Town Planning
Layout, Near Sharadadevi ...Appellant/s
Nagar Circle, Mysuru-570 009
(In person)
-Versus-
Branch Manager,
M/s. United lndia insurance
Company Ltd., Divisional Office- 1,
Devaraja Mansion ...Respondent/s
Prince of Wales Road,
Chamarajapuram,
Mysuru-570 004
(Notlce seroed- Absent)
ORDER
BY SRI RAVI SHAN!iAR. JUDICIAL MEMBER The Appellant,/ Complainant preferred this Appeal against the dismissal order passed by the District Consumer Apped No.2354 12024 Commission and submits that her husband was the owner of the Honda Motorcycle bearing Reg.No.KA-09-JF-4057 while he was driving on 6.2.2023 met an accident and suffered head injury, consequently succumbed to the injuries on 12.2.2023. The husband of the complainant had also obtained insurance policy to the said vehicle. The complainant after death of her husband being nominee and beneficiary had claimed for personal accident benefits, the said claim was repudiated for the reason that the premium was not paid towards the personal accident coverage and shown their inability. Aggrieved by the sarne, she approached the District Commission alleging deficiency of service and sought for payment of the personal accident benefits as per the policy.
2. Tll-e District Commission after trial dismissed the complaint holding the premium was not paid towards personal accident coverage. Against which the appellant/complainant came before this Commission.
3. Perused the certified copy of the order and memorandum of appeal, the complainant also filed a memo with order passed in appeal No.236l/2O23 passed by the Hon'ble Principal Bench, Bengaluru and submits that the case w 2 Appeal No.2354/2024 is also with respect to the none payment of the premium towards personal coverage, since the personai accident premium is mandatory. The respondent company ought not to decline the payment of personal accident benefits to the benehciary. They declined for receiving the premium tovvards personal accident coverage itself amounts to deficiency of service. Hence direction was given to the respondent company for payment of the personal accident benefits, the same principle applies to the case on hand. Hence prays to allow the complaint and direction given to the respondent company for payment of personal accident benefits as per the policy.
4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent submits that the husband of the complainarlt voluntarily declined to pay the personal accident benehts and he had voluntarily given letter for not covering the personal accident benefits. Basing on the said proposal, this insurance company had issued own damage policy along with third party liability policy and not covered the personal accident benefits. Though the personal accident coverage is mandatory at the time of issuance of the policy, the husband of the complainant declined to pay the said amount. Having no option, they issued 3 Appeal No.2354/2024 insurance vehicle poiicy without covering the personal accident benefits. The sarne was produced before the District Commission as Ex.R2. The District Commission considering the proposal form issued by the complainant,s husband, dismissed the complaint holding there is no any deficiency of service. The ground urged for allovr,ing the appeal is not satisfactory and not in accordance with the terms and conditions of the policy, hence prays to dismiss the appeal also, in the interest of justice and equity.
5. Perused the certifled copy of the order and memorandum of appeal and other documents produced by both parties, the complainant during the course of arguments had submitted that the husband ol the appellant also had another vehicle where he had optecl personal accident coverage even prior to taking this policy from this insurance company, he had taken earlier policy from another insurance company i.e. Chola MS General Insurance Company and in that policy he had opted for personal accident coverage and submits that he had not issued any proposal form for taking the policy a fresh from the insurance compan\,. The earlier policv u'as made over to this insurance company and a fresh policy was bi 4 I Appeal No.2354 /2024 issued. The insurance company intentionally left the payment of premium for the personal accident coverage and she had no knowledge why the said premium was not collected by the insurance company. Even the complainant suspects the authenticity of the proposal form signed by her husband and submits that there is no reason for none payment of the premium towards personal accident benehts. The insurance company in order to avoid payment has concocted the said proposal form (Ex.R2) in order to decline the claim and she is legally entitled to get benefits under the head of personal accident benefits, hence prays to allow the appeal.
6. It is an admitted fact that, the vehicle bearing Reg.No.KA-09-JF-4057 was originally covered by pervious insurance company i.e. Chola MS General Insurance Company Ltd., wherein the personal accident benefits were covered, subsequently the husband of the complainant opted for policy from this insurance company. Since the personal accident premium is mandatory and compuisory, the respondent company cannot decline for not covering the personal accident benefits. Though the insured declines to pay the premium towards personal accident coverage, they are not supposed to 5 Appeal No.2354/2024 issue polic_r, onlv covering the ou'n damage and third partlr coverage, they ought to receive the premium towards the personal benefits since it is mandatory and compulsory, if the insured intended to not to pay the persona.l accident premium. They could have rejected the proposal itself, instead of that they have issued the policy without covering the personal accident coverage. The said act itself amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the respondent company in not covering the personal accident ccverage. The Insurance Company also failed to appreciate the facts that the vehicle was covered personal accident coverage in the previous policy and though noticing the said the insuralrce company not insisted for payment of the personal accident benefits. Anyhow considering the deliciency in service for not covering the personal accident benefits which is mandatorv- and also applying the principles laid down in the Appeal No.236112O23 delivered by the Principal Bench which u'as furnislred by the appellant. Our Principal Bench had categorically held the Insurance Company for payment of personal accident benefits, even the premium towards personal accident benefits was not received. Hence, 6 Appeal No.235412024 the appellant/lnsurance Companv is liable to pay the personal accident benelits to the complainant.
7. The District Commission after appreciating the said facts had lailed to notice that there is deficiency of service on the part of the respondent in not accepting the premium towards personal accident coverage which is mandatory and compulsory. Hence the order passed by the District Commission is set aside. Accordinglv the appeal is allowed and consequently the complaint is hereby allowed. Hence, we proceed to pass the following:-
ORDER The appeal is allowed and consequently the complaint is hereby allowed.
The Opposite Party is directed to pay personal accident benefits of Rs.15.00 lakhs to the complainalt along with compensation Rs. 1,00,000/- for deficiency of service Rs.25,000/- towards litigation expenses within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order, failing which the above said amount shall carrying 97o interest per annum till realization. 7
Appeal No.235412024 Send a copy of this order to both parties as well as Concerned District Commission.
J; N
lli l')ao
SMT,SUT$ITA C.BACEWADI
(Lady Member) (Judicial Member)
Jtk/-
8