The Supreme Court has stayed the NCDRC’s order directing United India Insurance to pay ₹82.8 lakh to Rajasthan Royals over Sreesanth’s 2012 IPL injury, putting the high-profile insurance dispute under further judicial review.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has stayed a directive issued by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) that had ordered United India Insurance Co. Ltd to pay ₹82.80 lakh to Royal Multisport Pvt Ltd, the parent company of IPL franchise Rajasthan Royals, over a claim arising from cricketer S. Sreesanth’s knee injury during the 2012 Indian Premier League season.
A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta passed the interim order while hearing the insurer’s appeal challenging the NCDRC’s April 2024 ruling.
“He (Sreesanth) did not play for a single day (in IPL 2012),”
the bench remarked during the proceedings, as it stayed the execution of the consumer commission’s order until further notice. The matter has been posted for further hearing.
ALSO READ: Rajasthan Royals vs Insurance Company: Sreesanth’s 2012 Injury Case Reaches Supreme Court
Background of the Dispute
In March 2012, Royal Multisport Pvt Ltd, which manages the Rajasthan Royals franchise, contracted several players for the IPL season and obtained a special contingency insurance policy from United India Insurance. The policy, worth ₹8.70 crore, was designed to cover losses arising from player non-participation due to injuries, including loss of player fees, remuneration, and related payments, for the period between March 28 and May 28, 2012.
On March 28, 2012, during a practice session in Jaipur, Sreesanth reportedly suffered a knee injury, later confirmed by medical tests to have rendered him unfit for the entire season. Subsequently, the franchise filed a claim of ₹82.80 lakh with the insurer in September 2012, submitting medical documentation including X-rays and MRI scans.
NCDRC’s Findings and Order
A surveyor appointed by United India Insurance acknowledged that the knee injury was caused by a “sudden, unforeseen and unexpected event,” bringing it within the policy’s coverage terms.
However, the insurance company repudiated the claim, citing alleged non-disclosure of a pre-existing toe injury suffered by Sreesanth.
In April 2024, the NCDRC ruled in favor of Royal Multisport Pvt Ltd, terming the insurer’s rejection “unsustainable” and constituting a deficiency in service.
The Commission observed that:
“When the fact of a knee injury is established through evidence such as X-rays, MRI reports, and expert medical opinions, repudiation based on a pre-existing toe injury—unrelated to the knee injury and not proven to have recurred during the policy period—cannot stand.”
Accordingly, it directed United India Insurance to pay ₹82.80 lakh to the franchise for wrongful repudiation.
Supreme Court Intervention
Challenging the NCDRC’s decision, United India Insurance approached the Supreme Court, arguing that the Commission had erred in its interpretation of policy terms and medical evidence.
The apex court has now stayed the operation of the NCDRC order, pending further examination of the case’s merits.
With this interim relief, the payment obligation of ₹82.80 lakh is on hold until the Court concludes its review.
Case Title:
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. Versus ROYAL MULTISPORT PRIVATE LIMITED,
Civil Appeal Diary No. 33872/2025
