Skip to main content

'Can't deny mediclaim for magnetic treatment of osteoarthritis'

A consumer forum has said Rotational Field Quantum Magnetic Resonance (RFQMR), a non-invasive osteoarthritis treatment, could not be called an alternative or experimental therapy and ordered an insurance firm to pay up for rejecting two claims.
Dismissing New India Assurance Co's argument that the treatment was not recognized by the Indian Medical Council, the forum asked it to pay first complainant Sanyuktaben Shah the insured amount of Rs 1.05 lakh with a compensation of about Rs 46,000, and second complainant Bhisham Lambh Rs 1.30 lakh with a compensation of Rs 40,000.
The forum held that the insurance company had not produced any evidence to show that RFQMR was not recognized by the Indian Medical Council. "Only mentioning the same in the mediclaim policy clause would not be held just and proper for repudiating the claim," it said.
Vile Parle resident Sanyuktaben Shah, in her complaint on 2010, said she came to know about RFQMR about five years ago when osteoarthritis attacked her knee joints. She took the treatment at a Bangalore-based company's Andheri centre in 2008 and was in regular consultation with doctors and physiotherapists as there was still some pain. She also visited a health care centre and was recommended some oral medicines which worked. That year in December, she submitted a claim for Rs 1.05 lakh, which was repudiated.
Juhu's Bhisham Lambh also underwent the treatment after crippling pain in his knees from December 2009. After the 21-day therapy in May 2010, he sent the insurance company a claim of Rs 1.30 lakh. A month later, it was rejected. He moved the South Mumbai District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum in October 2010.
In both cases, the insurance company said the treatment was experimental and unproven and, therefore, according to the terms and conditions of the mediclaim policy, they were rejected. It stuck to its stand in the forum.
The forum ruled otherwise after taking into consideration the literature produced by the complainants. It showed that RFQMR significantly decreases pain, increases mobility, stability and power of the knee joint, and increases cartilage thickness in osteoarthritis patients. "Furthermore, as per the documents of objectives of Indian Medical Council which is placed on record by the complainant, it appears that the council does not have any object to approve any specific treatment or disapprove any treatment," the forum said.

Comments

Most viewed this month

Appellate authorities under Special Statutes cannot be asked to condone delay

Madras High Court in R.Gowrishankar vs. The Commissioner of Service Tax has held that Appellate authorities cannot be asked to condone the delay, beyond the extended period of limitation A Division Bench comprising of Justices S. Manikumar and D. Krishnakumar, made this observation while considering an appeal filed against Single Bench order declining to set aside the order made in the condone delay petition filed by the petitioner to condone 223 days in filing the appeal before the Commissioner of Service Tax (Appeals). Article referred: http://www.livelaw.in/appellate-authorities-special-statutes-cannot-asked-condone-delay-beyond-extended-period-limitation-madras-hc/

'Seize assets to pay damages to accident victim'

Her story might be an inspiration for the physically challenged but justice has remained elusive for her. In 2008, a bus accident left research engineer S Thenmozhi, 30, paraplegic. In April 2013, the motor accident claims tribunal directed the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (TNSTC) to provide her a compensation of 57.9 lakh. However, TNSTC refused to budge and on Tuesday a city court ordered attaching of movable assets of the transport corporation. Thenmozhi was employed in C-DOT, a telecom technology development centre in Bangalore. On July 21, 2008, she was coming to Chennai in a private bus. Around 2am, the bus had a flat tyre and the driver parked it on the left side of the road near Pallikonda in Vellore district on the Bangalore-Chennai highway. While the tyre was being changed, a TNSTC bus of Dharmapuri division hit the stationary bus. The rear part of the bus was smashed and passengers were injured. Thenmozhi who had a seat at the back of the bus suffered...

Mumbai ITAT rules income of offshore discretionary trust is subject to tax in India

The Mumbai Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has recently determined the following issue in the affirmative in the case of Manoj Dhupelia: Should the income of an offshore discretionary trust be subject to tax in India, if no distributions have been made to beneficiaries in India? The question arose from appeals filed by individual beneficiaries in relation to a Lichtenstein-based trust, the Ambrunova Trust and Merlyn Management SA (the Trust) with the ITAT. It is important to note that the individuals in this case were amongst those first identified by the Government of India (GOI) as holding undeclared bank accounts in Lichtenstein. The ITAT ruling raises the following issues: Taxation of Trust Corpus: ITAT classified the corpus of the trust as "undisclosed income" and declared it taxable in the hands of the beneficiaries. Taxation of Undistributed Income: ITAT refused to draw a distinction between the corpus and undistributed income from the trust and declared i...