CWP-22910-2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Serial No.120 CWP-22910-2026 Decided on:27.07.2026 Mayank Sehrawat . . . Petitioner Versus ICICI Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. and others . . Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Present: Mr. Rajesh Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner. TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J.(ORAL) The petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the third respondent/Insurance Ombudsman to decide the petitioner’s complaint dated 24.05.2025, Annexure P-6, against non-settlement of his ‘motor own damage claim’ pertaining to policy no.3005/355122929/00/000, issued by the ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited. The claim was registered as complaint no.CHD-G-020-2526-0084 dated 16.09.2025, vide communication, Annexure P-7. 2. Learned counsel submits that after registration of the complaint, the petitioner received a communication dated 16.09.2025, Annexure P-7, seeking certain documents; the same were duly furnished by him vide email dated 18.09.2025, Annexure P-8. Thereafter, no notice was received from the Ombudsman, nor did any hearing take place. The emails sent by the petitioner seeking decision of the complaint remained unanswered; he has referred to the MEHAK HURIA 2026.07.29 15:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment CWP-22910-2026 -2- latest email dated 16.03.2026, Annexure P-10, in that regard. It is further contended that in terms of Rule 17(4) of the Insurance Ombudsman Rules, 2017 (for short, ‘the 2017 Rules’), Annexure P-9, the third respondent is mandated to finalise its findings and pass an award within three months of receiving all requirements from the complainant. This mandate has not been adhered to. 3. Keeping in view the nature of directions being issued, which are not to the prejudice of the respondents, service upon them is dispensed with. 4. Considering the facts aforementioned as also the position under the 2017 Rules specifying the time period to pass the award, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the third respondent to consider and decide the petitioner’s aforementioned complaint expeditiously. (TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) 27.07.2026 JUDGE Mehak Whether reasoned/speaking? Yes/No Whether reportable? Yes/No MEHAK HURIA 2026.07.29 15:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment