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

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Valuation Report of Jewellery once made is effective for Four Assessment Years

The division Bench of the Delhi High Court in Pr.Commissioner of Wealth Tax vs. Raghu Hari Dalmia held that a valuation report made by a registered valuer once adopted shall be in effect for four assessment years unless an event has occurred whereby the value is increased or decreased. The High Court made it clear that the event of “search” under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot compel the assessee to undertake a fresh valuation.
2 comments
Read more

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more

Mere Agreement To Sell The Leased Property To Tenant Would Not Terminate Landlord-Tenant Relationship

In CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 1237­1238 OF 2019, Dr. H.K. Sharma vs Shri Ram Lal, the tenant had objected against the eviction suit filed by the landlord, claiming that the landlord-tenant relationship between them had ceased to exist by virtue of an agreement for sale entered between them and that he has already paid some money in advance based on the agreement. The tenant contented as the landlord-tenant relationship did not exist, the landlord cannot evict him. The matter went through various forums and finally landed before the Supreme Court in appeal. The Supreme Court referring to the judgment in Shah Mathuradas Maganlal & Co. vs. Nagappa Shankarappa Malage & Ors., held that in the instant case the lease agreement included no clauses on the fate of the tenancy. A fortiori, the parties did not intend to surrender the tenancy rights despite entering into an agreement of sale of the tenanted property. In other words, if the parties really intended to surrender their tenancy ...
2 comments
Read more