CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION
.....
F.No.CIC/AT/A/2009/000074
Dated, the 18th May, 2009.
Appellant : Smt.T.Sreekumari Amma
Respondents : National Insurance Company Limited
In this second-appeal filed by the appellant, the issue for decision
is whether information requested through her RTI-application dated
26.07.2008 be authorized to be disclosed. The CPIO and the Appellate
Authority had communicated their replies to the appellant through the
letters dated 17.09.2008 and 05.11.2008 respectively.
2. Pursuant to Commission’s notice dated 18.03.2009, matter came
up for hearing on 29.04.2009. Respondents were present through
Shri A. Madhavaprakash, CPIO and Shri R.P. Nair, Deputy Manager, but
the appellant was absent when called.
3. Appellant’s RTI-application stated the following:-
“I had sent two petitions regarding the denial of Insurance claim
to my Car. One petition was sent to the Divisional Manager on
25.2.08 and one to the Regional Manager grievance cell on
3.4.08. Both the offices had not responded to the letters sent by
registered post.
Being a government owned Company these offices have more
obligations to the public rather than other private companies.
Any how, I want to know what the action taken on my letter
dt.3.4.08 sent to you by registered letters.
“AND”
How the claims against the Car bearing the Registration
No.KL.01AH.0443, having the same problem once objected in the
Divisional Office and then settled & paid.”
4. The Appellate Authority’s reply dated 05.11.2008 informed
appellant that as regards her query of action on her letter dated
AT-18052009-18.doc
Page 1 of 3
03.04.2008, the matter was taken up with Popular Automobiles, Kollam
and with the Surveyor. Copies of the letter received from Popular
Automobiles and the Surveyor, Mr.Vinod were enclosed for the
appellant’s information. Appellant was further informed that this being
the case of the non-transfer of policy in favour of RC owner, the
Company had expressed its inability to settle the claim in favour of the
appellant.
5. As regards the second-part of the information pertaining to
another car, which according to the appellant, was similarly placed,
respondents informed her that this was a third-party information, which
was personal to the third-party and as this was also a matter of
commercial confidence of the Company vis-à-vis insured, it could not be
shared with the appellant.
6. Appellant’s second-appeal petition had stated that the requested
information should be disclosed in order to highlight how the Company
took different positions in identical cases. She calls it a case of
highhandedness and corruption.
7. I agree with the respondents that appellant could not be allowed
access into the information of a third-party held by the Insurance
Company, viz. National Insurance Company Limited as such information
is undeniably personal to that third-party besides being a matter of
commercial confidence of the Company. The denial of information
within the meaning of Sections 8(1)(j) and 8(1)(d) was, therefore,
justified and is upheld.
8. This being so, it is also important to note that appellant has
brought up a valid point regarding the position taken by the respondents
in regard to insurance claim in two different cases ⎯ in one of which
the claim was admitted while in the other it was turned down. As a
public authority engaged in providing an important service to the
citizens, it is incumbent on them to ensure that a citizen’s
apprehension that she was treated inequitably is properly addressed.
9. It would be, therefore, entirely in order if the higher
management of the public authority voluntarily examines the complaint
of this petitioner regarding differential treatment and furnishes to her a
suitable reply. It is recommended that this be done by the public
authority.
AT-18052009-18.doc
Page 2 of 3
10. The decision of the Commission be also forwarded to the CMD,
National Insurance Company Limited for action deemed fit in regard to
the petitioner’s complaint.
11. Appeal disposed of with these directions.
12. Copy of this direction be sent to the parties.
( A.N. TIWARI )
INFORMATION COMMISSIONER
AT-18052009-18.doc
Page 3 of 3