Skip to main content

Insurer can’t deny claim citing lack of post-mortem: Consumer forum

A consumer forum has held that the absence of a post-mortem report cannot be a ground for repudiation of an accidental death insurance claim in cases where the police are sure about the cause of death and there is no confusion.

On Wednesday, the forum directed New India Assurance to pay the widow of a 45-year-old man who died of snake bite in 2008 the insured amount of Rs 5 lakh, along with a compensation of Rs 1.05 lakh. Holding the company guilty of indulging in unfair trade practice, the forum said, "Depending upon the situation and circumstances and reports of the medical officer, the hospital as well as the police, the claim should have been sanctioned on humanitarian grounds. There is no proof to show that there was any mischief or mala fide intention of the complainant in demanding the claim."

The forum rejected the insurance company's defence that it was not in the domain of the police to conclude the cause of death and that the job was of medical doctors, and that despite the advice of doctors, the woman—Dombivli resident Usha Bhoir—had failed to allow the post-mortem.

"The police are also a government and responsible investigative authority. As they were sure about accidental death, they did not go for post-mortem. So, merely saying that a post-mortem was not done and hence claim is repudiated is unfair," the forum said.

The forum observed that Bhoir could not have insisted on a post-mortem and the final authority in the matter was the police. It pointed out that the police had recorded the statements of witnesses, conducted a panchnama and finally on July 10, 2008, had submitted a summary report to the sub-divisional magistrate, stating that the death was accidental.

Bhoir's husband Ashok had taken membership of a luxury club in Prabhadevi in 2007. The club had a tie-up with the insurance company and as per rules insured its members. In her complaint to the Central Mumbai District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum in 2012, Bhoir said that on June 22, 2008, at 3pm, her husband had gone into the cattle shed on their premises, where he was bitten by a snake hidden in the grass. Ashok was taken to hospital, where at 9.15pm he suffered cardio-respiratory failure due to poisoning and died.

Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/City/Mumbai/Insurer-cant-deny-claim-citing-lack-of-post-mortem-Consumer-forum/articleshow/35739014.cms

Comment: This one appears a little irregular. It is my opinion that Post-Mortem report is necessary if it is possible to do so as it was here. The police cannot make assumptions where death is not of natural causes.

Comments

Most viewed this month

Deposit Of Minimum 20% Fine/Compensation U/s 148 NI Act Mandatory

In OP(Crl.).No.348 OF 2019, T.K.SAJEEVAN vs FRANCIS T.CHACKO, the appeal was filed against the order of the lower court to deposit 25% of the fine before filling of appeal. The appellant argued that the deposit introduced through the Section 148 of the NI Act after amendment was directory in nature as it used the term 'may' while mentioning the issue of deposit. The Kerala High Court however disagreeing held that in view of the object of the Legislature while incorporating Section 148 into N.I. Act, the word 'may' will have to be read as 'shall'. The imposition of payment contemplated under Section 148 N.I. Act cannot be restricted to some prosecutions and evaded in other prosecutions. Since the amount directed to be deposited being compensation, undoubtedly, it is liable to be ordered to be deposited irrespective of the nature of the prosecution. Therefore, the word 'may' can only be taken to have the colour and meaning of 'shall' and there

NCLT - Mere admission of receipt of money does not qualify as a financial debt

Cause Title : Meghna Devang Juthani Vs Ambe Securities Private Limited, National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai, CP (IB) No. 974/MB-VI/2020 Date of Judgment/Order : 18.12.2023 Corum : Hon’ble Shri K. R. Saji Kumar, Member (Judicial) Hon’ble Shri Sanjiv Dutt, Member (Technical) Citied:  Carnoustie Management India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CBS International Projects Private Limited, NCLT Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. & Anr vs. Union of India & Ors. (2019) Sanjay Kewalramani vs Sunil Parmanand Kewalramani & Ors. (2018) Pawan Kumar vs. Utsav Securities Pvt Ltd 2021 Background Application was filed under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 alleging loan of Rs, 1.70 cr is due. The Applicate identified herself as the widow and heir of the lender but could not produce any documents proving financial contract between her Late husband and the CD but claimed that the CD has accepted that money was received from her husband. The applicant subsequently filed rejoinder claiming the debt t

Jurisdiction of consumer forum is not ousted even if the other party has filed suit on the same matter in Civil Court

In Yashwant Rama Jadhav v. Shaukat Hussain Shaikh, First Appeal No. 1229 of 2017, decided on 18.11.2017,  the grievance of the petitioner before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission was that appellants/complainants had entered into agreements with the respondents for purchase of residential flats, which the respondents were to construct and despite paying the substantial amount to the respondents, the construction of the flats had not been completed. The State Commission dismissed the complaints and ruled in favor of respondents against which the appellants approached the National Commission. The NCDRC held that Section ‘3’ of the Consumer Protection Act, to the extent it is relevant provides that the provisions of the Act shall be in addition and not in derogation of the provisions of any other law for the time being in force. Thus the remedy available under the Consumer Protection Act is an additional remedy, which Parliament has made available to a consumer. Even