[2025:RJ-JP:22885] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7080/2025 Universal Sompo General Insurance Company Ltd., Registered And Corporate Office 8Th And 9Th Floor (South Side), Commerz International Business Park, Oberoi Garden City, Off Western Express Highway, Goregaon East, Mumbai- 400063 Through Its Constituted Attorney. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Sarju Devi W/o Shyoji Ram, Ward No. 6, Nasnoda, Garoti, Jaipur, Rajasthan- 303007. 2. The Insurance Ombudsman, Ground Floor, Jeevan Nidhi- Ii, Bhawani Singh Road, Jaipur- 302005. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Prakhar Agarwal with Mr. Virender Agarwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vinod Goyal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN Order 08/05/2025 By way of this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the Award dated 27.03.2025 passed by respondent No.2-Insurance Ombudsman in favour of respondent No.1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No.2-Insurance Ombudsman has committed error in passing the award dated 27.03.2025 in favour of respondent No.1. It is submitted that as per Investigation conducted by the Independent Investigator deputed by the insurance company, there were serious discrepancies in the complaint filed by respondent No.1. It is submitted that no evidence is available on record with regard to the fact that insured succumbed to injuries sustained in road accident. Counsel submits that the claim filed by the complainant-respondent No.1 was repudiated on the ground of misrepresentation and non- [2025:RJ-JP:22885] (2 of 2) [CW-7080/2025] disclosure of material facts in the complaint thus, award passed by the learned Insurance Ombudsman is not sustainable. Learned counsel appearing for complainant-respondent No.1 submits that there is no illegality in the award passed by respondent No.2-Insurance Ombudsman in favour of respondent No.1. I have considered the submissions, advanced by parties and perused the material available on record. It appears from the award passed by respondent No.2- Insurance Ombudsman that after taking note of entire facts and circumstances of the case, respondent No.2-Insurance Ombudsman directed the Insurance Company to settle this claim for Rs. 10,00,000/- as full and final settlement. It has also been observed by respondent No.2-Insurance Ombudsman that court has accepted Final Police Report submitted by the Investigating Agency and Post- Mortem Report is proving that the proximate cause of death is due to road accident by an unknown vehicle and merely on the basis of some suspicion and oral statements recorded by private investigator of the Insurance Company, Insurance Company cannot escape from its liability. The policy issued by the Insurance Company was a group policy and not an individual policy. In view of above submissions, I do not find any illegality in the award passed by respondent No.2- The Insurance Ombudsman. Accordingly, this writ petition being devoid of merits is dismissed. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J GAUTAM JAIN /67