Delhi High Court
Aakash Goel vs Union Of India & Ors. on 18 November, 2024
Author: Manmohan
Bench: Tushar Rao Gedela, Manmohan
$~S-32
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 15920/2024 & C.M.No.66801/2024
AAKASH GOEL .....Petitioner
Through: Mr.Anuj Aggarwal with Ms.Divya
Aggarwal, Ms.Kritika Matta,
Mr.Avinash Kumar and Mr.Pradeep
Kumar, Advocates.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr.Ravi Prakash, CGSC with
Ms.Archana Surve and Ms.Ashtu
Khandelwal, Advocates for UOI.
Mr.Kamal Mehta, Advocate for R-4.
% Date of Decision: 18th November, 2024
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
JUDGMENT
MANMOHAN, CJ : (ORAL)
1. Present public interest petition has been filed seeking directions to the
Respondent-Life Insurance Corporation of India ("LIC") to provide the
policy documents to all the policy holders of Pradhan Mantri Jeevan Jyoti
Bima Yojana ("PMJJBY"). The Petitioner further seeks directions to the
Respondent-Ministry of Home Affairs ("MHA") to directly provide
information of all the deceased individuals to the Respondent-Life Insurance
Corporation ("LIC") so that the nominee/family members of the deceased
policy holders can directly get the insurance claim of INR 2,00,000/- under
the PMJJBY.
2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the Respondents have
not been providing the policy documents to the policy holders of PMJJBY
as required under Regulation 8(1) of the Insurance Regulatory and
Development Authority of India (Protection of Policy Holders Interests)
Regulations, 2017. He also states that the Registrar General and Census
Commissioner, MHA have not been sharing the database of all deceased
individuals in the country with the Department of Financial Services
("DFS").
3. He states that if such information is provided directly to DFS and LIC
by the Registrar General of India, then DFS/LIC can themselves ascertain as
to which all of the deceased individuals had held the insurance policy. He
states that such sharing of information would also assist in curtailing
insurance related frauds.
4. He states that the Petitioner had on 20th December, 2021, made a
representation to the Ministry of Finance stating that only one out of ten
family members of the policy holders are getting the benefit under the
PMJJBY. He states that on 23rd December, 2021, after initiating proceedings
under the Right to Information Act 2005 ('Act, 2005'), the Petitioner
received a reply from the Ministry of Finance which was vague.
5. He further states that on 25th April 2024, the Petitioner filed an
application under the Act, 2005, seeking information from the DFS and a
reply to the same was received on 14th May, 2024. He states that the said
reply makes it clear that LIC is not providing the policy documents with
respect to enrolment of individuals in PMJJBY but only providing an
acknowledgement slip-cum-certificate of insurance and that the DFS does
not use the central death database for processing the claims under the
PMJJBY.
6. He states that the Petitioner has brought the aforementioned
grievances to the notice of the Respondents vide letter/notice dated 21st
August, 2024, however, no reply to the same has been received till date.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the Petitioner, this Court is of the
view that the present petition is based on the presumption and assumption
that the family members / nominees of the deceased are not aware of the fact
that the deceased held an insurance policy under the PMJJBY and that no
policy documents had been provided to the policy holders. No letter written
by any of the family members / nominees of the deceased has been enclosed
complaining of non-issuance of policy documents to the policy holders.
Consequently, there is no material on record justifying the said presumption
and assumption.
8. This Court is further of the view that if the course of action as
suggested in the present writ petition is adopted, it may lead to a scam, as
benefits under the policy may be appropriated by individuals who have not
applied and who are not verified. Further, it is settled law that an insurance
contract is a contract between the parties and no public interest petition is
normally maintainable with regard to such contracts.
9. Moreover, policy holders cannot be presumed to be illiterate or
incapable of approaching the Courts for redressal of their grievances.
10. Consequently, this Court finds no justification and/or rationale to
entertain the present petition. Accordingly, the present writ petition along
with the application is dismissed.
MANMOHAN, CJ
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J
NOVEMBER 18, 2024
KA
