NCDRC asks insurance firm to reimburse claim of Rs 1.5 lakh

Image
Press Trust of India New Delhi
Last Updated : Mar 03 2017 | 2:13 PM IST
The apex consumer commission has asked an insurance firm to reimburse Rs 1.5 lakh medical claim to a man, saying it cannot be presumed that certain expenses incurred in treatment were excluded from the cover.
"Merely because it has been mentioned that insurance under the policy was subject to conditions, clauses, warranties, exclusion etc. Attached, (and) in the absence of attaching conditions, exclusion, etc., it cannot be presumed that expenses incurred in treatment of disease were excluded from the coverage," the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) said.
The commission made the observation as it dismissed a revision petition filed by Star Health and Allied Insurance Company Limited against the State Commission's order to reimburse over Rs 1.5 lakh to Haridas C K, a Kerala resident.
Haridas had taken an insurance policy of Rs 2 lakh but was denied the claim when he got hospitalised.
The NCDRC bench, while granting him the relief, said "I do not find any illegality, irregularity or jurisdictional error in the impugned order and revision petition is liable to be dismissed."
According to the complaint, Haridas was admitted to a hospital in Kerala with chest pain on February 10, 2012, and underwent angioplasty. He was discharged on Febraury 13, 2012.
It alleged that his claim made on March 15, 2012 for the reimbursement of the expenses of Rs 1,62,522 was rejected by the insurance company on April 28, 2012, on the basis of exclusion clause in the policy schedule.
He submitted that there was no such condition at the time of issuing the policy and receiving the premium.
The insurance firm contended that the schedule attached with policy contained the exclusion clause.
The Commission noted that the firm remained ex-parte before District Forum and before the State Commission despite the opportunities given to it.
The NCDRC had dismissed the firm's application for taking the exclusion clause on record in October last year. "Once exclusion clause is not on record, order passed by learned State Commission dismissing appeal is in accordance with law, as there was no exclusion clause attached to the policy," the Commission said.

Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

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

More From This Section

First Published: Mar 03 2017 | 2:13 PM IST

Next Story