Prayagraj, India | July 3, 2026
A dispute over a motor insurance claim has brought SBI General Insurance under scrutiny after a policyholder alleged that the company approved only part of his accident-related repair claim while rejecting damage to the rear section of his vehicle. Dissatisfied with the assessment, the vehicle owner has formally requested a fresh inspection, arguing that all visible damage resulted from the same road accident.
The case involves Kamalakar Singh, whose Bolero SUV (Registration No. UP73AK3591) was involved in a road accident. The vehicle was insured under Policy No. MIB/1503590, and the insurance claim was registered as Claim No. MVO4006698.
Partial Repair Approval Sparks Dispute
According to the policyholder, the work authorization issued by the insurer approved replacement of only a few front-end components, including the front bumper, left-hand wheel arch, and lower grille. However, the company reportedly declined to include damage to the rear portion of the vehicle, stating that it was not related to the reported accident.
The vehicle owner has challenged this conclusion, insisting that the rear damage occurred during the same incident and should therefore be covered under the insurance claim.
Policyholder Describes Sequence of the Crash
In his written representation to the insurer, Kamalakar Singh explained that the accident began when the vehicle collided head-on with a tree. He stated that the impact caused the SUV to spin violently before its rear section struck thick tree branches along the roadside or possibly came into contact with an unidentified passing vehicle.
According to him, the force of the incident shattered the rear tail lamp and left scratches on the back portion of the vehicle.
The policyholder also stated that he was under severe mental stress immediately after the collision and was unable to identify the complete extent of the damage at the accident site. It was only after regaining composure and inspecting the vehicle carefully that the rear damage became evident.
Vehicle Inspection Report Cited as Supporting Evidence
To strengthen his claim, the policyholder has referred to a Vehicle Condition Report/Job Record prepared on June 23, 2026. According to him, the document records the vehicle’s condition, including an odometer reading of 7,760 kilometers, and notes multiple damaged areas, supporting his argument that the accident affected more than just the front section of the SUV.
He believes the inspection report justifies a fresh technical evaluation before the claim is finalized.
Formal Request for Re-Inspection
The policyholder has submitted an official application to the insurer’s Prayagraj office requesting an immediate re-inspection of the vehicle at the repair workshop. He has urged the company to reassess the broken rear tail lamp and scratches and determine whether they were caused during the reported accident.
He maintains that his request is not for additional compensation beyond the policy terms but for a fair assessment of all accident-related damage.
Awaiting the Insurer’s Response
As of now, SBI General Insurance has not issued any public statement regarding the allegations or the request for a re-inspection. The matter remains under consideration, and the company’s response will likely determine whether the disputed rear damage is reassessed and potentially included in the final claim settlement.
The outcome of this case could highlight the importance of transparent claim assessments and timely technical inspections in resolving disagreements between insurers and policyholders.