CWP-18615-22026 -1- IN TTHE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGAARH 111 CCWP-18615-2026 DDate of Decision: 07.07.2026 INDUSIND NNIPPON LIFE INSURANCE CCOMPANY LIMITED …Petitioner(s) Versus ARUNA SACCHDEVA AND OTHERS …Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBBHUVAN DAHIYA Present:- MMr. Sanjeev Goyal, Advocate, MMr. Adhiraj Bhandari, Advocatee annd Mr. Saurav Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. TRIBHUVANN DAHIYA, J. (Oral) TThe petition has been filed seekiing a writ of certiorari quashingg the order datedd 21.04.2026, passed by the thirrd respondent - State Consumerr Disputes Reedressal Commission, Chanddigarh, in MA/22/2026 inn FA/287/2025, directing liquidation of Fixxed Deposit Receipts (FDRs)) amounting ₹122,53,131.17, the amount deposiited by the petitioner before thee State Commisssion during pendency of the ffirst appeal. Further, a writ off mandamus haas been sought directing the third respondent to retain thee statutory pre-ddeposit of the aforesaid amount iin FDRs till final adjudication off the second aappeal statedly filed by the ppetitioner before the Nationall Consumer Dis putes Redressal Commission.

2. Learned counsel contended that the complaint filed by the firstt respondent beffore the District Commission, CCC/05/2025, was partly allowedd vide order datted 01.07.2025, directing the peetitioner (opposite party therein)) to refund thee entire insurance premium amounting ₹9,29,669 to thee AMAN DUA respondents/coomplainants along with interestt. The petitioner challenged thee 2026.07.14 14:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document CWP-18615-22026 -2-

order before tthe State Commission, and duuring its pendency in terms off directions issuued, the entire outstanding ammount was deposited with thee Commission in the form of two FDRs amounting ₹6,20,078.01 andd ₹6,33,053.16. The appeal was finally dismisseed vide order dated 06.01.2026,, and the petitioner challenged the same before tthe National Commission; filingg slip, Annexuree P-7, has been attached with thhe petition to establish the fact.. Sometime lateer, the respondents/complainantss filed an application before thee State Commis sion seeking release of the amoount lying in the FDRs and thee application waas allowed vide impugned order dated 21.04.2026, directing thee release of FDDRs in favour of the responndents/complainants subject too furnishing inddemnity bonds to indemnify thee petitioner/judgment debtor inn terms of the oorder of the National Commissioon, if any, passed in the secondd appeal. Learneed counsel further contended thhat release of the amount is inn violation of Seections 71 and 72 of the Consummer Protection Act, 2019, as thee State Commisssion is not seized of the matter aany longer and the petitioner hass already approaached the National Commission . He, however, does not disputee that pursuant tto passing of the order dated 21.004.2026, the amount has alreadyy been released to the respondents/complainantss. It is also not disputed that thee National Commmission has not granted any sttay on the order passed by thee State Commisssion.

3. Inn view of the aforementionedd facts, this Court is of thee considered vieew that there is no ground to eentertain the petition, especiallyy when the imppugned order dated 21.04.2026 has already been executed byy releasing the awarded amount to the respo ndents/complainants subject too furnishing the indemnity bonds in terms thereewith. The petition, accordingly,, AMAN DUA 2026.07.14 14:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document CWP-18615-22026 -3- stands disposeed of with liberty to the petitionner to raise this plea before thee National Commmission in accordance with law, if so advised. (TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA)) JUDGE 07.07.2026 Ad Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No AMAN DUA 2026.07.14 14:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document

CWP-18615-22026 -1- IN TTHE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGAARH 111 CCWP-18615-2026 DDate of Decision: 07.07.2026 INDUSIND NNIPPON LIFE INSURANCE CCOMPANY LIMITED …Petitioner(s) Versus ARUNA SACCHDEVA AND OTHERS …Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBBHUVAN DAHIYA Present:- MMr. Sanjeev Goyal, Advocate, MMr. Adhiraj Bhandari, Advocatee annd Mr. Saurav Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. TRIBHUVANN DAHIYA, J. (Oral) TThe petition has been filed seekiing a writ of certiorari quashingg the order datedd 21.04.2026, passed by the thirrd respondent - State Consumerr Disputes Reedressal Commission, Chanddigarh, in MA/22/2026 inn FA/287/2025, directing liquidation of Fixxed Deposit Receipts (FDRs)) amounting ₹122,53,131.17, the amount deposiited by the petitioner before thee State Commisssion during pendency of the ffirst appeal. Further, a writ off mandamus haas been sought directing the third respondent to retain thee statutory pre-ddeposit of the aforesaid amount iin FDRs till final adjudication off the second aappeal statedly filed by the ppetitioner before the Nationall Consumer Dis putes Redressal Commission.

2. Learned counsel contended that the complaint filed by the firstt respondent beffore the District Commission, CCC/05/2025, was partly allowedd vide order datted 01.07.2025, directing the peetitioner (opposite party therein)) to refund thee entire insurance premium amounting ₹9,29,669 to thee AMAN DUA respondents/coomplainants along with interestt. The petitioner challenged thee 2026.07.14 14:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document CWP-18615-22026 -2-

order before tthe State Commission, and duuring its pendency in terms off directions issuued, the entire outstanding ammount was deposited with thee Commission in the form of two FDRs amounting ₹6,20,078.01 andd ₹6,33,053.16. The appeal was finally dismisseed vide order dated 06.01.2026,, and the petitioner challenged the same before tthe National Commission; filingg slip, Annexuree P-7, has been attached with thhe petition to establish the fact.. Sometime lateer, the respondents/complainantss filed an application before thee State Commis sion seeking release of the amoount lying in the FDRs and thee application waas allowed vide impugned order dated 21.04.2026, directing thee release of FDDRs in favour of the responndents/complainants subject too furnishing inddemnity bonds to indemnify thee petitioner/judgment debtor inn terms of the oorder of the National Commissioon, if any, passed in the secondd appeal. Learneed counsel further contended thhat release of the amount is inn violation of Seections 71 and 72 of the Consummer Protection Act, 2019, as thee State Commisssion is not seized of the matter aany longer and the petitioner hass already approaached the National Commission . He, however, does not disputee that pursuant tto passing of the order dated 21.004.2026, the amount has alreadyy been released to the respondents/complainantss. It is also not disputed that thee National Commmission has not granted any sttay on the order passed by thee State Commisssion.

3. Inn view of the aforementionedd facts, this Court is of thee considered vieew that there is no ground to eentertain the petition, especiallyy when the imppugned order dated 21.04.2026 has already been executed byy releasing the awarded amount to the respo ndents/complainants subject too furnishing the indemnity bonds in terms thereewith. The petition, accordingly,, AMAN DUA 2026.07.14 14:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document CWP-18615-22026 -3- stands disposeed of with liberty to the petitionner to raise this plea before thee National Commmission in accordance with law, if so advised. (TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA)) JUDGE 07.07.2026 Ad Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No AMAN DUA 2026.07.14 14:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document