In a significant affirmation of the role of the Federal Insurance Ombudsman, the Federal Constitutional Court of Pakistan has dismissed an appeal filed by Pak-Qatar Family Takaful Limited, thereby upholding the decisions of the Federal Insurance Ombudsman and the Islamabad High Court directing the payment of Rs. 3.85 million to the nominee of a deceased policyholder.
A two-member bench comprising Ali Baqar Najafi and Muhammad Karim Khan Agha announced the verdict after hearing FCPLA No. 275 of 2025, observing that there was no legal or constitutional infirmity in the impugned judgment that warranted interference.
According to the record, the late Muhammad Waqas Anjum had obtained a takaful policy from Pak-Qatar Family Takaful Limited on 5 March 2019, providing a death cover of Rs. 3.85 million. He passed away on 8 May 2019 and had nominated his sister, Arisha Kanwal, as the beneficiary, who subsequently lodged the insurance claim.
The takaful company rejected the claim on multiple grounds, including objections regarding the nominee’s relationship, alleged non-submission of medical records, and unsubstantiated allegations relating to the deceased’s health. Upon examination of the complaint, the Federal Insurance Ombudsman, in its order dated 6 June 2022, allowed the claim, holding that no credible or convincing evidence had been produced to justify its rejection.
In addition to directing payment of the claim amount, the Federal Insurance Ombudsman also ordered compensation for unnecessary delay and referred the matter to the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan for appropriate regulatory action.
Subsequent review proceedings, including a presidential representation and a writ petition before the Islamabad High Court, were dismissed, with the courts consistently upholding the findings of the Federal Insurance Ombudsman.
In its final observations, the Federal Constitutional Court noted that the issuance of the policy, the death of the policyholder, and the nomination were undisputed facts. The Court emphasized that an insurance or takaful claim cannot be rejected merely on the basis of delayed intimation or unproven allegations, particularly in the absence of any established misrepresentation regarding the policyholder’s health.
The Court therefore refused leave to appeal and dismissed the petition, reaffirming the Federal Insurance Ombudsman’s mandate in ensuring fair treatment of policyholders and their nominees and strengthening confidence in the insurance grievance redressal framework.
