News Citation : 2026 LN (CGSCDRC) 17
February 19, 2026 : The Chhattisgarh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has allowed an appeal filed by the State Bank of India and set aside a district commission order that had directed the bank to pay Rs 4 lakh in accident insurance to a widow.
In its order pronounced on February 19, 2026, in Appeal No. SC/22/FA/390/2025, the State Commission overturned the May 30, 2025 decision of the District Consumer Commission, Korea, which had partly allowed the complaint of Smt. Jaimani Devi against the Branch Manager, State Bank of India.
The case arose from the death of Jaimani Devi’s husband, Late Rajesh Sharma, who was working as a mining sardar at SECL’s Gevra project. On June 12, 2019, he died in a road accident after a trailer allegedly driven rashly struck him while he was on duty. An FIR was registered at Deepka police station under Section 304A of the IPC.
Sharma held a savings account with SBI and had been issued a Global International debit card. Jaimani Devi claimed that the debit card carried personal accident insurance coverage of Rs 5 lakh and sought payment of Rs 4 lakh following her husband’s death. She argued that despite repeated visits and a registered notice sent in February 2023, the bank failed to settle the claim, forcing her to approach the District Consumer Commission.
The District Commission accepted her complaint in part and directed SBI to pay Rs 4 lakh along with 6 percent annual interest from the date of complaint until realization. It also awarded Rs 8,000 for mental and financial distress and Rs 3,000 towards litigation costs.
However, the State Commission, comprising Justice Gautam Chourdiya (President) and Member Pramod Kumar Verma, found that the District Commission had erred in granting relief.
On reviewing the record, the State Commission noted that while Sharma had indeed been issued a debit card, there was no evidence that the specific card variant carried personal accident insurance applicable in his case. The Commission examined the insurance benefits linked to various SBI debit card categories and observed that coverage depended on the card type and conditions, including recent transaction requirements.
Crucially, the Commission found that no documentary proof was produced to show that any transaction had been carried out using the debit card within 90 days prior to the date of death, a condition typically required for activation of such insurance cover. There was also no evidence to establish that the account qualified as a salary package account with enhanced purchase protection benefits.
The Commission further observed that references were made to a personal accident policy issued by SBI General Insurance Company with a policy number 137300-0000-00 for Rs 4 lakh. However, that policy had been issued on January 14, 2013 and was valid only until January 13, 2014. No documents were filed to show renewal of the policy or payment of premiums between 2014 and 2019. Additionally, SBI General Insurance was not made a party to the complaint.
In light of these findings, the State Commission concluded that Jaimani Devi was not entitled to receive any insured amount under either the debit card scheme or the earlier personal accident policy. It held that the District Commission had passed its order without proper consideration of these material facts.
Accordingly, the appeal filed by the State Bank of India was allowed, the May 30, 2025 order of the District Commission was set aside, and the consumer complaint was dismissed.
Case Reference : Appeal No. SC/22/FA/390/2025: Branch Manager, State Bank of India vs. Smt. Jaimani Devi
