HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 9088 of 2025 Court No. - 2 HON'BLE MRS. SANGEETA CHANDRA, J. HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J. 1. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Prasoon Srivastava, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 & 3. 2. This writ petition has been filed with the following main prayers:- "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 19.06.2025 passed by the opposite party No.1 i.e., Assistant Secretary/Deputy Secretary/Secretary, Insurance Ombudsman, Lucknow, whereby he has dismissed the complaint 21.05.2025 filed by the petitioner against the rejection of the life insurance claim by the opposite party No.2 i.e. Authorized Signatory (Claims) concerned Police No.-C187244116 vide impugned order dated 27.02.2025, in most arbitrary and illegal manner, the impugned rejection orders are contained as Annexure No.1 and 2 to this writ petition. (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite party No.2 to consider the lawful claim of the petitioner and release the insured amount in favour of the petitioner, in the interest of justice." 3. It is the case of the petitioner that she is widow of late Mitlesh Kumar Singh, who have taken an Insurance Policy from the respondent no.2 & 3 of Rs.1,00,00,000/-. The authorized agent had taken signatures of the husband of the petitioner on various papers of the proposal form and Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Umesh Pratap Singh, P.K. Singh Bisen Counsel for Respondent(s) : Prasoon Srivastava Sanju Singh .....Petitioner(s) The Assistant Secy./ Deputy Secy./ Secy. Insurance Ombudsman Lko. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) assured the husband of the petitioner that he would take care of all the affairs himself and that necessary documents like Policy Cover will be provided to him shortly. After filing up of the proposal form on 16.04.2024, the husband of the petitioner was examined from authorized medical practitioner of the Insurance Company. The husband of the petitioner also paid premium as per policy, but he died on 28.11.2024. She filed a claim form, which was rejected by the respondent no. 2 on 27.02.2025 alleging non-disclosure of material facts and information at the time of filing up of proposal form. On repudiation of petitioners claim, the petitioner approach the respondent no.1 as per Rule 17(3) (ii) of Insurance Ombudsman Rules, 2017. The case of the petitioner was rejected on the ground that Insurance Ombudsman cannot award compensation exceeding Rs.50,00,000/- and the claim of the petitioner was for Rs.1,00,00,000/-. 5. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that a Division Bench of this Court in Writ-C No. 21818 of 2023, 'Santosh Kumar Vs. Assistant Secretary/Deputy Secretary/Secretary Insurance Ombudsman, Lucknow and Others', had entertained a writ petition that the Insurance Ombudsman had dismissed the complaint after the claim of the writ petitioner was repudiated by the Insurance Company. The grounds for rejection of claim were technical in nature and relating to limitation and pecuniary jurisdiction. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also stated that the Division Bench in its judgement dated 29.04.2025, Neutral Citation No.- 2025:AHC:66456:DB has held that a writ petition to be maintainable against the order passed by Insurance Ombudsman rejecting the complaint against repudiation of insurance claim. 7. Learned counsel for the respondents no.2 & 3 has argued that Insurance Ombudsman has rejected the claim of the petitioner only on the ground of lack of pecuniary jurisdiction. The repudiation of the insurance claim has been made by the Insurance Company, a private insurance company on the ground of non-disclosure of material information and complete facts. Such facts have to be thrashed out by taking evidence and the appropriate remedy for the petitioner would be to either filed a WRIC No. 9088 of 2025 2 complaint before the District Forum or before the Permanent Lok Adalat. 8. Accordingly, we disposed of this writ petition with a direction to the petitioner to approach the Permanent Lok Adalat against the repudiation of her claim by the Insurance Company. September 22, 2025 Darpan Sharma WRIC No. 9088 of 2025 3 (Brij Raj Singh,J.) (Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.) Digitally signed by :- DARPAN SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench