- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:13077 WP No. 19933 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 19933 OF 2024 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: 1. MRS. NISCHALA, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS W/O LATE SHANTH KUMAR. 2. MISS. JANYA AGED ABOUT 11 YEARS D/O LATE SHANTH KUMAR. 3. MISS. DHWANI AGED ABOUT 8 YEARS D/O LATE SHANTH KUMAR. 4. MASTER SHAYAN AGED ABOUT 15 MONTHS S/O LATE SHANTH KUMAR (SINCE PETITIONERS 2 TO 4 ARE MINORS REPRESENTED BY THEIR MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN MRS.NISCHALA) ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO. 20/30, NAGONDANAHALLI WHITEFIELD Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:13077 WP No. 19933 of 2024 BENGALURU – 560 066. …PETITIONERS (BY SMT.VACHANA N.V., ADVOCATE FOR SRI. NARENDRA S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. HDFC BANK, KASTURBA ROAD, M.G.ROAD BENGALURU – 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. 2. M/S HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., SONY INDIA PVT. LTD., IRDI REG NO.146 CIN U6030MH2007PLC177117 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT 1ST FLOOR, HDFC HOUSE 165/166 BAKBAY RECLAMATION H.T.PAREKH MARG CHURCH GATE MUMBAI – 400 020 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED PERSON …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI PALLAVA R., ADVOCATE FOR R-1; SRI S.KRISHNA KISHORE, ADVOCATE FOR R-2) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH LETTER DTD. 30.01.2024 AS PER ANNX-L ISSUED BY R2 AS ILLEGAL AND OPPOSED TO LAW; DIRECT THE R-2 INSURANCE COMPANY TO ALLOW THE CLAIM OF THE PETITIONER IN CLAIM NO. RR-C123-13848127. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:13077 WP No. 19933 of 2024 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioners are before this Court seeking the following prayers: “a. Issue writ of certiorari by quashing letter dated 30-1-2024 as per Annexure ‘L’ issued by R2 as illegal and opposed to law, b. Issue writ of mandamus directing the respondent-2 insurance company to allow the claim of the petitioners in Claim No.RR-C123-13848127. c. Grant such other relief/s as the situation demands with cost in the interest of justice and equity.” 2. Heard Smt Vachana N V, learned counsel appearing for petitioner, Sri Pallava R, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 and Sri S Krishna Kishore, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2. 3. The prayer of the petitioners is calling in question repudiation of the claim of insurance that the 1st petitioner would become entitled on the death of her husband. The claim - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:13077 WP No. 19933 of 2024 is repudiated on the ground that it is not one of the illness that is covered under the insurance policy. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners would dispute the position. The case at hand revolves round the contract between the two parties. The petitioners do have a remedy to approach the Insurance Ombudsman. The apprehension of the petitioners is that the moment the petition is disposed precipitative or coercive steps would be taken against the 1st petitioner who has child of 2 years and has lost her husband. 5. In that light, I deem it appropriate to direct the 1st respondent/Bank or the Insurance not to precipitate the matter, while directing the petitioners to approach the Insurance Ombudsman. In the event the petitioners would approach the Insurance Ombudsman within 2 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order, the Insurance Ombudsman shall answer the claim of the petitioners within 4 weeks thereafter. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:13077 WP No. 19933 of 2024 6. Since the objections are already filed by the respondents before this Court, the same can be considered as objections before the Insurance Ombudsman. The petitioners are reserved liberty to approach this Court, in the event the Insurance Ombudsman would answer the claim against the petitioners. 7. It is made clear that the respondent/Bank shall not take any coercive or precipitative action against the mortgaged property of the petitioners, till the Insurance Ombudsman would answer the claim, as it is an admitted fact that if the insurance amount comes to the hands of the petitioners, the entire loan would get cleared, which is subject to clarification. With the aforesaid observations, petition stands disposed. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE BKP List No.: 1 Sl No.: 92