- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:10400-DB WA No. 1455 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR N. V. ANJARIA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN WRIT APPEAL NO. 1455 OF 2024 (GM-RES) BETWEEN: THE MANAGER (CRM) LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA DIVISIONAL OFFICE-1 J.C. ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 002 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY SECRETARY (LEGAL), LEGAL CELL ZONAL OFFICE, JEEVAN MANGAL HAYES ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 025. …APPELLANT (BY SRI HALLUR SHIVAYOGI BASAVARAJ, ADVOCATE) AND: SRI A.V. NAGARAJAN S/O LATE ANANTHA SASTRY AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS R/AT NO.42/28, 39TH ''A'' CROSS 11TH MAIN, 4TH BLOCK JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 041. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI ADITYA NARAYAN, ADVOCATE) Digitally signed by H K HEMA Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:10400-DB WA No. 1455 of 2024 THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 06.08.2024 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE IN W.P.NO.3257 OF 2021 (GM-RES). THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE N. V. ANJARIA and HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN) Aggrieved by the order dated 06.08.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge insofar as it relates to Writ Petition No.3257/2021, the petitioner therein has preferred this intra court appeal with the following prayers: "Wherefore, it is prayed that this Hon'ble court may be pleased to: 1. Set aside the order dated 06.08.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.3257/2021 (GM-RES); 2. Grant such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case." - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:10400-DB WA No. 1455 of 2024 2. The appellant is Life Insurance Corporation of India and the respondent is a policy holder called 'Jeevan Saral'. He had availed of the policy and paid a premium of Rs.48,040/- per annum for a period of ten years. After maturity, the respondent was informed that he is entitled for a maturity benefit of Rs.1,74,362/- by the appellant. Aggrieved by the same and on the ground that the respondent is actually entitled to a maturity benefit of Rs.10,00,000/-, the respondent approached the office of Insurance Ombudsman (Karnataka), which accepted the contention of the respondent and passed the following award: "AWARD Taking into account, the facts & circumstances of the case, and the submissions made by both the parties during the course of Personal hearing the RI is directed to settle the maturity claim under the said policy for maturity sum assured of `.10,00,000/- together with loyalty additions if any as per policy terms and conditions without penal interest. The Complaint is 'Allowed'." Aggrieved by the same, the appellant herein preferred Writ Petition No.3257/2021 and prayed for setting aside the award. The learned Single Judge did not find any error in the same and has dismissed the writ petition, against which this writ appeal is filed. - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:10400-DB WA No. 1455 of 2024 3. The contention of the appellant is that as per the terms of the contract, the respondent is entitled to a benefit of Rs.1,74,362/- only and not Rs.10,00,000/- as held by the Insurance Ombudsman and the learned Single Judge. 4. Per contra, the respondent justifies the orders passed by the Insurance Ombudsman and the learned Single Judge and prays for dismissal of the writ appeal. 5. The maturity amount to be paid to the respondent depends upon the terms and conditions of the insurance contract entered into between the appellant and the respondent. As per the insurance policy issued by the appellant in favour of the respondent, the column mentioning the sum assured reads as under: "DIVISIONAL OFFICE: BANGALORE DIVISION I Branch Office: YESHWANTHPUR BRANCH 61D 1 Policy No 2 Date of Commencement 3 Date of Commencement Risk 4 Table & Term Maturity Sum Assured (Rs.) Death benefit Sum Assured under main plan (Rs.) Accident Benefit Sum Assured (Rs.) Term Rider Sum Assured (Rs.) Installment Premium for main Plan (Rs.) Installment Accident Benefit Premium (Rs.) Installment Term Rider Premium (Rs.) Total Installment Premium (Rs.) 616218516 28/05/2010 29/05/2010 165 10 1000000 1000000 47040.00 1000.00 .00 48040.00 - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:10400-DB WA No. 1455 of 2024 6. The contention of the appellant is that the sum assured of Rs.10,00,000/- mentioned twice in the aforementioned column pertains to death benefit and accident benefit and does not pertain to sum assured on maturity of the policy, if the insured does not die or suffer any accident. According to the appellant, the respondent is entitled to the sum assured upon completion of ten years i.e., on maturity of the policy would be Rs.1,74,362/-. 7. The Insurance Ombudsman, upon verification of the policy, has concluded that a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- mentioned in the aforementioned column should be considered as a sum payable to the insured upon maturity of the policy and the other Rs.10,00,000/- towards death or an accident claim. It has further come to the conclusion that nowhere the terms and conditions of the policy mentions that the respondent is entitled to only a sum of Rs.1,74,362/- as contended by the appellant herein and based on the terms and conditions of the contract has entertained the petition of the respondent herein and has passed the award. The decision of the Insurance Ombudsman has been found to be correct by the learned Single Judge and accepting the reasoning given by the Ombudsman, the writ petition has been dismissed. - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:10400-DB WA No. 1455 of 2024 8. The appellant in the course of the proceedings has failed to show from the insurance contract or the policy issued in favour of the respondent, how the respondent would be entitled to a sum of Rs.1,74,362/- only as contended by the appellant. There is no mention of the said amount any where in the contract. The policy issued mentions a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- in the column referred to above and under the given facts and circumstances of the case, in our opinion, Rs.10,00,000/- has to be considered as the sum assured upon the maturity of the policy. We do not find any error either in the order of the Insurance Ombudsman or in the order of the learned Single Judge passed in Writ Petition No.3257/2021. For the aforementioned reasons, the writ appeal is hereby dismissed. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of. SD/- (N. V. ANJARIA) CHIEF JUSTICE SD/- (M.I.ARUN) JUDGE hkh. List No.: 1 Sl No.: 12