Delhi High Court Upholds Order Allowing RTI Applicant To Seek Information Relating To Insurance Policies By Furnishing Basic Details Other Than Policy Number
|The Delhi High Court was considering an intra-court appeal challenging the order of the Single Judge.
The Delhi High Court has upheld an order allowing a policy holder to seek information regarding a policy without furnishing the policy number but by furnishing basic details. The High Court also highlighted that LIC handles 27 crore insurance policies and in the absence of certain details, it would be difficult, rather impossible, to retrieve any information sought in respect of a particular policy.
The High Court was considering an intra-court appeal challenging the order of the Single Judge whereby a petition was disposed of with certain directions, modifying the order of the Chief Information Commissioner (CIC).
The Division Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia stated, “It is not that in terms of the impugned judgment passed by the learned Single Judge dated 29.01.2026; the appellant cannot seek the information relating to the insurance policies where she is insured. All what is required by the appellant is to furnish the details other than the policy number, such as name of the insured party‟s name, date of birth, gender, address with pin code, mobile number, email id and bank account number as registered under NEFT. The purport of the impugned judgment is that in case, any information regarding the policy is sought by a person insured, he can seek such an information without even furnishing the policy number, however, in such an eventuality, the aforesaid details are required to be furnished, in absence whereof it will be quite impossible for the LIC to give the information.”
“We may observe, at the cost of reiteration, that the impugned judgment passed by learned Single Judge does not put any bar on providing the information if it is sought by an insured person even in absence of the policy number and therefore, we are of the opinion that no prejudice is caused to the appellant by the impugned judgment dated 29.01.2026”, it added.
The appellant appeared in-person.
Factual Background
The appellant filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (RTI Act), seeking the detailed list of all the policies wherein she was made the insured party at any point in time during her lifetime. The said application was considered by the respondent, Central Public Information Officer, Life Insurance Corporation of India (CPIO), who decided the application, stating therein that since the base of LIC is the policy number issued to the life assured, without the policy number, the respondent-CPIO was unable to provide information sought by the appellant. Dissatisfied with the said reply furnished by the respondent-CPIO, the appellant preferred a first appeal, and the First Appellate Authority upheld the order passed by the respondent-CPIO. The appellant, thereafter, filed a second appeal before the Central Information Commission.
The CIC observed that it is imperative for LIC to establish a system that facilitates the retrieval of policy and all data of policyholders, including cases where the policy number is not available, particularly in urgent situations. The CIC, by the said order, also directed the respondent-CPIO to take necessary measures to ensure disclosure of information concerning LIC Policy even in instances where the policy number is not provided. The respondent preferred a Petition before a Single Judge, which was disposed of by granting liberty to the appellant to file a fresh application before the LIC with a direction that such an application should be dealt in accordance with the extant rules. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant instituted the proceedings of the instant letters patent appeal.
Reasoning
On a perusal of the impugned judgment, the Bench noted that it was not that the appellant could not seek the information relating to the insurance policies where she was insured. All that was required by the appellant was to furnish the basic details.
“The view taken by the learned Single Judge, in our opinion, is the correct view. It is understandable that if under some insurance policy some person’s life has been insured without his or her knowledge, he/she may not know the policy number, however, the details regarding insured party’s name, date of birth, gender, address with pin code, mobile number, email id and bank account number as registered under NEFT are such details which can be presumed to be within the knowledge of the person seeking the information. Accordingly, the purport of the impugned judgment passed by the learned Single Judge is that even in absence of the policy number information regarding the policy by the insured person can be obtained, however, for seeking such an information, necessary details as listed above have to be provided”, it added.
The Bench also took note of the fact that the impugned judgment passed by the Single Judge did not put any bar on providing the information if it was sought by an insured person, even in the absence of the policy number.
Coming to the ground raised by the appellant regarding non-maintainability of the writ petition before the Single Judge based on the provisions contained in Section 23 of the RTI Act, the Bench held, “The bar created by Section 23 of the RTI Act will be applicable to a Court for entertaining any suit, application or other proceedings in respect of any order made under the Act. However, such a bar will not be an impediment in any manner for this Court to exercise its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the same being one of the basic features of our Constitution.”
Thus, finding no good ground to interfere with the impugned judgment passed by the Single Judge, the Bench dismissed the appeal.
Cause Title: Ambika Gupta v. CPIO LIC of India (Neutral Citation: 2026:DHC:2925-DB)