Archive · 3 Oct 2026
Kolkata Commission Orders Insurer to Pay Mother’s Death Claim
A woman bought life insurance worth Rs 1 crore and paid her first yearly premium.
She became ill and died in February 2023, and her son asked the insurer to pay the claim.
The insurer rejected it, first saying some documents were false and later saying she had not disclosed illnesses.
The consumer commission said the insurer did not provide evidence for these claims.
It also noted that the insurer did not take part in the case.
The commission decided the policy was still in force when the woman died.
It ordered the insurer to pay Rs 99.41 lakh, plus Rs 50,000 in compensation and Rs 10,000 for legal costs.
The Kolkata District Consumer Commission ordered IndiaFirst Life Insurance to pay a nominee Rs 99.41 lakh on a rejected Rs 1 crore death claim.
It also awarded Rs 50,000 in compensation and Rs 10,000 in litigation costs.
The insurer first alleged forged or tampered financial and occupation documents, then later argued that pre-existing illnesses had not been disclosed.
The commission found no evidence supporting either allegation and noted that the illness argument was absent from the original repudiation letter.
The insurer did not appear or file a written response; the commission held that the policy was in force when the policyholder died.
- Who
- The deceased policyholder’s son, IndiaFirst Life Insurance, and the Kolkata District Consumer Commission.
- What
- The commission ordered the insurer to pay Rs 99.41 lakh, Rs 50,000 in compensation and Rs 10,000 in litigation costs.
- When
- The policyholder died on February 1, 2023; the order is reported as dated September 25, 2026.
- Where
- Kolkata, before the Kolkata District Consumer Commission.
- Why
- The commission found the insurer’s rejection arbitrary and unsupported by evidence, and held that the policy was in force on the date of death.
Nominee’s Position
Insurer’s Allegations
Claim validity
Nominee’s Position
The son argued that the policy remained valid because his mother died within the grace period after the renewal premium fell due.
Insurer’s Allegations
The insurer rejected the death claim, initially describing it as fraudulent.
Documents and medical history
Nominee’s Position
The son disputed the allegations, saying the illnesses developed around his mother’s final hospitalisation.
Insurer’s Allegations
The insurer alleged that financial and occupation documents were forged or tampered with, and later alleged that pre-existing diseases had not been disclosed.
Evidence
Nominee’s Position
The son maintained that the claim had been wrongly rejected.
Insurer’s Allegations
The commission recorded that the insurer did not appear, file a written response or provide evidence supporting its allegations.
- Insurer
- IndiaFirst Life Insurance Company Ltd.
- Sum assured
- Rs 1 crore
- First annual premium
- Rs 58,509.12, paid January 23, 2022
- Date of death
- February 1, 2023
- Claim awarded
- Rs 99.41 lakh
- Additional award
- Rs 50,000 compensation and Rs 10,000 litigation costs
- Renewal premium due
- January 24, 2023; the commission found the policy was in force when she died within the grace period
- Commission
- President Kallol Chattopadhyay and member Udayan Roy
