‘Mental shock is natural’: Nagpur panel orders SBI to pay widow ₹5 lakh despite six-year delay
According to the complaint, the woman’s husband held an account at SBI’s Tri Junction Cantonment branch in Nagpur.
- May 17, 2026,
- Updated May 17, 2026 5:34 PM IST
A consumer commission in Nagpur has directed the State Bank of India to pay ₹5 lakh to a widow who filed an insurance claim six years after her husband’s death, saying it was natural for her to take time to recover from the “mental shock” caused by the tragedy, according to a report by PTI.
In an order passed last month, the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (Additional DCF) in Nagpur said a bank cannot rely on a 90-day claim deadline if customers were not properly informed about the insurance cover linked to their debit cards.
Don't Miss: 'This should terrify every CEO': How Xi Jinping's China destroyed 10 American industries
The commission described the bank’s refusal to settle the claim as “unjust and a deficiency in service”.
It ordered SBI to pay the ₹5 lakh insurance amount with six per cent annual interest from 5 September 2019, when the complaint was filed. The bank was also directed to pay ₹10,000 towards mental agony and litigation costs.
Claim filed years after husband’s death
According to the complaint, the woman’s husband held an account at SBI’s Tri Junction Cantonment branch in Nagpur. She said eligible debit cardholders were entitled to insurance cover of up to ₹5 lakh, but neither she nor her husband had been informed about the scheme.
Her husband died in a road accident in September 2013.
The woman told the commission she suffered severe mental shock after his death and took considerable time to recover from the grief.
She said she only became aware of the insurance scheme later and approached the bank on 26 March 2019 to seek the benefit. Despite submitting the required documents, the bank did not take a decision on her claim, she alleged.
After failing to secure relief through other means, she approached the consumer commission. She also sought ₹50,000 in compensation for mental and physical agony and ₹20,000 towards legal expenses.
SBI said card was not covered
In its response, SBI argued that the complaint was “false and baseless”. The bank said it did not separately provide insurance-related information or documents to debit cardholders.
It also said the deceased held a ‘MasterCard Classic’ ATM/debit card, which was not covered under the insurance scheme. The bank further argued that no claim had been filed within the mandatory 90-day period.
Commission rejects bank’s stand
After reviewing the records, the commission said “it is natural for the complainant to suffer a mental shock and take some time to recover from that situation” after the sudden death of her husband.
It rejected the bank’s argument that the card did not carry insurance protection, saying no clear documentary evidence had been submitted to prove this.
The panel noted that documents on record showed insurance cover was available for other categories of debit cards, but there was no specific exclusion mentioned for ‘MasterCard Classic’ cards.
“If the bank claims that insurance protection is not applicable to a specific card, then it is necessary to submit the clear conditions and their documentation,” the commission said.
It also noted that other cardholders had received insurance protection without paying additional charges.
“Therefore, giving different treatment to different customers under similar circumstances is unfair and constitutes a deficiency in service,” the commission held.
The commission further observed that there was no evidence to show the bank had informed the deceased or her family about the insurance benefit linked to the debit card.
“Had the opposite parties provided such information, the deceased or his heirs would have taken the necessary care,” it said.
Rejecting the claim solely because it was not filed within 90 days could not be accepted, the commission ruled, adding that the bank’s actions amounted to “unjust and a deficiency in service”.
A consumer commission in Nagpur has directed the State Bank of India to pay ₹5 lakh to a widow who filed an insurance claim six years after her husband’s death, saying it was natural for her to take time to recover from the “mental shock” caused by the tragedy, according to a report by PTI.
In an order passed last month, the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (Additional DCF) in Nagpur said a bank cannot rely on a 90-day claim deadline if customers were not properly informed about the insurance cover linked to their debit cards.
Don't Miss: 'This should terrify every CEO': How Xi Jinping's China destroyed 10 American industries
The commission described the bank’s refusal to settle the claim as “unjust and a deficiency in service”.
It ordered SBI to pay the ₹5 lakh insurance amount with six per cent annual interest from 5 September 2019, when the complaint was filed. The bank was also directed to pay ₹10,000 towards mental agony and litigation costs.
Claim filed years after husband’s death
According to the complaint, the woman’s husband held an account at SBI’s Tri Junction Cantonment branch in Nagpur. She said eligible debit cardholders were entitled to insurance cover of up to ₹5 lakh, but neither she nor her husband had been informed about the scheme.
Her husband died in a road accident in September 2013.
The woman told the commission she suffered severe mental shock after his death and took considerable time to recover from the grief.
She said she only became aware of the insurance scheme later and approached the bank on 26 March 2019 to seek the benefit. Despite submitting the required documents, the bank did not take a decision on her claim, she alleged.
After failing to secure relief through other means, she approached the consumer commission. She also sought ₹50,000 in compensation for mental and physical agony and ₹20,000 towards legal expenses.
SBI said card was not covered
In its response, SBI argued that the complaint was “false and baseless”. The bank said it did not separately provide insurance-related information or documents to debit cardholders.
It also said the deceased held a ‘MasterCard Classic’ ATM/debit card, which was not covered under the insurance scheme. The bank further argued that no claim had been filed within the mandatory 90-day period.
Commission rejects bank’s stand
After reviewing the records, the commission said “it is natural for the complainant to suffer a mental shock and take some time to recover from that situation” after the sudden death of her husband.
It rejected the bank’s argument that the card did not carry insurance protection, saying no clear documentary evidence had been submitted to prove this.
The panel noted that documents on record showed insurance cover was available for other categories of debit cards, but there was no specific exclusion mentioned for ‘MasterCard Classic’ cards.
“If the bank claims that insurance protection is not applicable to a specific card, then it is necessary to submit the clear conditions and their documentation,” the commission said.
It also noted that other cardholders had received insurance protection without paying additional charges.
“Therefore, giving different treatment to different customers under similar circumstances is unfair and constitutes a deficiency in service,” the commission held.
The commission further observed that there was no evidence to show the bank had informed the deceased or her family about the insurance benefit linked to the debit card.
“Had the opposite parties provided such information, the deceased or his heirs would have taken the necessary care,” it said.
Rejecting the claim solely because it was not filed within 90 days could not be accepted, the commission ruled, adding that the bank’s actions amounted to “unjust and a deficiency in service”.