[2026:RJ-JP:403] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 31/2026 1. S.B.I. General Insurance Company Limited, Through Manager, First And Second Floor, 9, Dwarka Niwas, Kailashpuri, Tonk Road, Jaipur. 2. S.B.I. General Insurance Company Limited, Through Manager, Natraj, 301, Junction Of Western Express Highway And Andheri, Kurla Road, Andheri (East) Mumbai 400069 ----Petitioners Versus Shokat Ali S/o Rahmat Khan, R/o Badho Ki Dhani, Mandawara, District - Sikar, Rajasthan - 332021 ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Prakhar Agrawal, Mr. Virendra Agrawal For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order 07/01/2026 1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, assailing the award dated 23.07.2025 passed by learned Permanent Lok-Adalat, Sikar, in Case No.65/2021, titled as 'Shokat Ali Vs. S.B.I. General Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr.', whereby the claim of the respondent has been accepted and the petitioners have been directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,48,208/- along with Rs.5,000/- as litigation expenses within 3 months from the date of the judgment, failing which 9% per annum interest shall be levied on the awarded amount from the date of filing of the complaint i.e. 29.06.2021. [2026:RJ-JP:403] (2 of 5) [CW-31/2026] 2. Brief facts giving rise to the present case are that the respondent/applicant - Shokat Ali (hereinafter referred to as the 'insured') had purchased the "Private Car Insurance Policy Package (Annual)" bearing Policy No.0000000019057631 for the period from 30.09.2020 to 29.09.2021 and having an 'Insured Declared Value' (IDV) of Rs.25,65,961/-. Such policy was purchased by the insured for his Toyota Fortuner 3.0(2016) bearing Registration No.RJ-23-UB-8335 (hereinafter referred to as the 'insured vehicle'). On 23.01.2021, the insured vehicle, being driven by his partner-Shri Dinesh Kumar (hereinafter referred to as the 'driver'), got punctured and took a roadside halt at Sahkari Samiti, between Danta and Ramgarh. Thereafter, in the midst of the driver changing such tyre, the insured vehicle was allegedly hit by a dumper bearing Registration No. RJ-23-GA-4580 and sustained vast damages after colliding with a nearby tree. As a result of the accident, the insured vehicle was brought to an authorized service center i.e. Om Metals Auto Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the 'service center') and intimation of the same was given to the insurance company, upon which a claim under the insurance policy came to be registered as Claim No.MVO552367. Thereafter, to process the settlement of the claim an independent surveyor was appointed. However, upon scrutiny of the claim, the averments made therein and the surveyor's findings, the insurance company repudiated the insured's claim. 3. Being aggrieved by the repudiation of the claim, the insured approached the learned Permanent Lok-Adalat, Sikar, alleging [2026:RJ-JP:403] (3 of 5) [CW-31/2026] deficiency in service and unfair trade practices on the part of the petitioner-insurance company. 4. The petitioner filed its reply to the complaint and vehemently opposed the submissions made therein. 5. Learned Permanent Lok-Adalat, Sikar, after considering the matter at length and including the objections raised by the petitioners-insurance company allowed the insured's complaint vide impugned award dated 23.07.2025, thereby directing the insurance company to pay Rs.10,48,208/- along with Rs.5,000/- towards litigation expenses within three months from the date of the award, and in case of default, the amount was to carry interest at 9% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint (29.06.2021) until realization. 6. Aggrieved by which, the petitioners have preferred the present writ petition. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the learned Permanent Lok-Adalat committed a serious jurisdictional error in passing the impugned award dated 23.07.2025, and failed to appreciate the facts and material on record. Consequently, the impugned award is bad in law; he therefore prays that the impugned award may kindly be set aside. 8. Heard and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the record. 9. From a bare perusal of the impugned award dated 23.07.2025, it is revealed that the insured-respondent, Shokat Ali, had purchased the Private Car Insurance Policy Package (Annual) bearing Policy No. 0000000019057631, valid from 30.09.2020 to [2026:RJ-JP:403] (4 of 5) [CW-31/2026] 29.09.2021. During the policy period, on 23.01.2021, the insured vehicle sustained damages while a punctured tyre was being changed. 10. It has also come on record that the insured vehicle was allegedly hit by a dumper bearing Registration No. RJ-23-GA- 4580, sustaining vast damages. Due intimation was given to the insurance company, following which an independent surveyor i.e. Shri Prem Narayan Gupta was appointed. As per the survey report, the surveyor assessed the loss at Rs.10,48,208/-. 11. From the record, it is also revealed that the claimant produced various documents (Annexures-1 to 7) to substantiate the averments in the claim, including the survey report (Annexure-4), which clearly assesses the loss at Rs.10,48,208/-. 12. Accordingly, the learned Permanent Lok-Adalat, after considering the facts and detailed submissions, accepted the claimant's case, holding that the insurer's grounds for repudiation were unsustainable in the eyes of law. A careful perusal of the award also reveals that the learned Permanent Lok-Adalat rightly invoked its jurisdiction under Section 22C(1) of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. And only after due consideration of the pleadings, evidence adduced by the parties, and material available on record, more specifically the survey report (Annexure-4), which assessed the loss at Rs.10,48,208/-, the Permanent Lok-Adalat passed a just and proper award while considering the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice adopted by the petitioner- Insurance Company. [2026:RJ-JP:403] (5 of 5) [CW-31/2026] 13. Therefore, the contention advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners that the learned Permanent Lok-Adalat erred in passing the impugned award cannot be accepted. 14. In view of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that the impugned award does not suffer from any jurisdictional error, perversity, or any legal infirmity so as to call for any interference by this Court under the jurisdiction conferred by Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 15. Accordingly, the present Civil Writ Petition fails and is hereby dismissed. 16. The stay application and all other pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (MANEESH SHARMA),J Seema/29