[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Kotak Mahindra Life Insurance Co. Ltd vs Prakash Bhatt (2026:Rj-Jd:14711) on 1 April, 2026
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2026:RJ-JD:14711]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 64/2026
1. Kotak Mahindra Life Insurance Co. Ltd., Through Its
Authorized Signatory, Having Its Branch Office At Flat No.
115/3, Solitaire Building, Near Sps School, Pwd Colony,
Jodhpur, Raj. 342001.
2. Kotak Mahindra Life Insurance Co. Ltd, Through Claims
Manager Groups, Having Its Head Office At - 7Th Floor,
Building No. 21, Infinity Park, Off Western Express
Highway, General A. K. Vaidya Marg, Malad (East),
Mumbai - 400097, Maharashtra Now At 9Th Floor, Unit
No. 901, A Wing Intelion Square, Building, No. 4, Infinity
Park, Off W.e. Highway, General Ak Vaidya Marg, Malad
(E), Mumbai 400097.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. Prakash Bhatt S/o Late Shri Lunaram, Resident Of Devi
Road, Vikas Nagar, Chandana Bhakhar, Jodhpur, 342008,
Raj.
2. Nemichand S/o Late Shri Lunaram, Resident Of Devi
Road, Vikas Nagar, Chandana Bhakhar, Jodhpur, 342008.
Raj.
3. Mentor Home Loan India Ltd., (Formerly Known As Mentor
India Ltd.), Through Its Authorized Signatory, Having Its
Branch At Residency Road, Jodhpur, Rajasthan 342001,
Raj.
4. Mentor Home Loan India Ltd., (Formerly Known As Mentor
India Ltd.), Through Its Manager Director, Having Its
Head Office At B-9, Mentor House, Govind Marg, Sethi
Colony, Transport Nagar, Jaipur - 302004, Raj.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Nahar
Mr. Prateek Kasliwal
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
01/04/2026
1. By way of filing the present writ petition, the petitioner has
prayed for the following reliefs:-
(Uploaded on 01/04/2026 at 07:36:02 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14711] (2 of 3) [CW-64/2026]
"In the circumstances the Petitioner prays that this
Hon'ble court may be pleased to:-
a) Allow the instant writ petition and set aside the Award
dated 17.07.2025 passed by the Learned Permanent Lok
Adalat, Jodhpur (Rajasthan); AND (Annex-1)
b) Pass any other order(s), which this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the
present case."
2. The award dated 17.07.2025 passed by the Permanent Lok
Adalat, Jodhpur in Public Utility Service Case No. 128/2020
(Prakash Bhatt & Anr. vs. Mentor Home Loan India Ltd. & Ors.)
has been challenged primarily on the ground that, while passing
the impugned award in favour of the claimants, the learned
Permanent Lok Adalat failed to appreciate that the deceased, who
was insured with the petitioner - Kotak Mahindra Life Insurance
Company Ltd., had obtained the insurance cover by concealing a
pre-existing ailment relating to liver/ kidney disease.
3. According to the petitioners, at the time of submitting the
proposal form, the deceased did not disclose that he was suffering
from chronic liver and kidney disease due to alcohol consumption.
It is contended that had the said fact been disclosed, the
insurance cover might not have been issued, or the terms and
conditions of the policy, bearing No. GA000232 dated 28.06.2018,
would have been different.
4. This Court repeatedly queried learned counsel for the
petitioners as to whether the deceased had died due to
liver/kidney disease, which, according to the insurance company,
had been concealed, and whether the medical records reflected
the same as the cause of death. In response, learned counsel
submitted that even if the liver/kidney disease was not the sole
cause of death, the concealment of a pre-existing ailment at the
(Uploaded on 01/04/2026 at 07:36:02 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:14711] (3 of 3) [CW-64/2026]
time of obtaining the insurance policy disentitled the claimants
from any relief granted by the Permanent Lok Adalat.
5. This Court does not find any merit in the aforesaid
contention. Insurance policies are essentially taken to provide
financial security and protection to the family against unforeseen
risks such as death or medical emergencies. After the death of the
insured, the reasons for alleged non-disclosure of pre-existing
ailments cannot be explained by the deceased. It would be unjust
to deny the benefit of the insurance policy to the family members
solely on the ground of non-disclosure of pre-existing ailments,
particularly when the insurance company has failed to establish
that such ailments were the cause of death. The family members
cannot reasonably be expected to contest the alleged non-
disclosure when it is not shown to be the proximate cause of
death.
6. In view of the aforesaid discussion, this Court finds no
illegality, perversity, or jurisdictional error in the impugned award
dated 17.07.2025 passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat, Jodhpur,
whereby the petitioner-insurance company has been directed to
pay a partial claim of Rs. 2,50,000/- (60% of the sum assured),
along with interest, to the claimants.
7. Consequently, the present writ petition is dismissed.
8. The stay petition and all pending applications, if any, stand
disposed of.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
1-divya/-
(Uploaded on 01/04/2026 at 07:36:02 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
