Soli Ardeshir Modi, who is over 80 years old, had a Mediclaim policy issued by New India Assurance. The policy had been in existence for several years and was renewed without break. He was insured for Rs 1 lakh and had accumulated a cumulative bonus of Rs 50,000, taking the total coverage to Rs 1.5 lakh. In March 2012 he was operated for inguinal hernia at Breach Candy Hospital, for which the total expenses came to Rs 1,83,219. He lodged a claim through M D India Healthcare Service (TPA). Though the available coverage was Rs 1.5 lakh, the insurance company sanctioned only Rs 62,814, stating the claim was computed according to the revised policy conditions.
Ratnakar, president of the Forum, in an order dated August 28, 2014, noted that the original policy was called "Mediclaim Insurance Policy (01/09/1996)" and the renewed policy was termed "Mediclaim Policy (2007)". It contained revised terms and conditions which had been incorporated without Modi's consent. Under the revised policy, sub-limits were imposed for room charges and other medical expenses, which did not exist earlier.
The Forum noted that the judgement of the Supreme Court in the case of Biman Krishna Bose v/s United India Insurance Co Ltd [(III) 2001 CPJ 10 (SC)], where it had been laid down that a renewal of a policy merely extends the policy period on identical terms and conditions as embodied in the original one. The Forum accordingly held that a revision in the policy conditions was not permissible and directed the insurance company to renew it on the same terms and conditions incorporated in the original policy. The Forum also directed the insurance company to pay the remaining amount of Rs 87,186, along with nine per cent interest from May 11, 2012 till payment. Additionally, compensation of Rs 8,000 and costs of Rs 3,000 were awarded to Modi.
Insurance companies mislead consumers, saying a mediclaim policy is a year to year contract, so the terms can be varied at the time of each renewal; you either take it or leave it. This is not legally permissible. A consumer has the right to insist the renewal be on the original terms and conditions and nothing detrimental to his interest can be unilaterally incorporated by the company.
The author is a consumer activist
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
