Skip to main content

Insurance company to pay Rs 92 lakh to woman who lost hubby to cancer

The state consumer commission has directed an insurance company to pay Rs 82 lakh, along with a compensation of around Rs 10 lakh, to the widow of a man who died of mouth cancer in 2010.

It held Life Insurance Corporation of India had wrongly repudiated the claim saying the man had a habit of chewing gutka and suffered from dyspepsia, a problem related to indigestion.

Relying on a national commission order in a similar matter, the panel observed non-disclosure of chronic dyspepsia in the proposal form cannot be a ground for repudiation.

"It is not a disease in itself but symptomatic of other diseases or disorders, characterized by vague abdominal discomfort, a sense of fullness after eating, eructation, heartburn, nausea and vomiting and loss of appetite," the commission said.

The commission observed the medical summary clearly said Rajendra Chavan chewed gutka 14 years prior to his death and not for 14 years as the insurance company claimed.

It noted the summary showed Chavan had been suffering from cancer for only about a month before his death.

"There is no valid document to rely on the contention of the insurance company to establish that the oral cancer was detected prior to the submission of the proposal form," the commission said.

It pointed out when the company's medical officers had certified Chavan's health before issuing the policies, the cancer was nonexistent.

The complainant Kalpana Chavan's husband had procured three separate policies for Rs 30 lakh, Rs 27 lakh and Rs 25 lakh.

On September 6, 2010, Chavan died at a hospital in Pune after suffering from mouth cancer.

Kalpana intimated the insurance company and submitted the three claims. The company obtained Chavan's medical summary from the hospital and concluded that he had suppressed the fact that he chewed gutka and suffered from dyspepsia.

It repudiated the claims in April 2011. Kalpana filed three separate complaints before the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission last year. The commission passed a common order in the three complaints.

Article referred: http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-12-29/mumbai/45674555_1_rs-10-lakh-mouth-cancer-gutka

Comments

Most viewed this month

Partition proceedings are vitiated even if single co-sharer is not made party or is not served in accordance with law

Cause Title :  Bhagwant Singh vs  Financial Commissioner (Appeals) Punjab, Chandigarh,  CWP-2132-2018 (O&M), High Court Of Punjab & Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Judgment/Order : 31.08.2022 Corum : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sudhir Mittal Background A large parcel of land was owned by the Nagar Panchayat. Thereafter, some of the co-sharers sold their shares to third parties including the petitioners herein. On 22.11.1995, respondents No.3 to 5 filed an application for partition of the land. The petitioners were not impleaded as parties.  On completion of proceedings, sanad was issued on 28.08.1996. Vide two separate sale deeds dated 28.05.2008 respondents No.3 and 5 sold some portion in favour of respondent No.6 and 7. These respondents sought implementation of the sanad resulting in issuance of warrants of possession dated 05.06.2008. Allegedly, it was then that the petitioners realized that joint land had been partitioned and that proceedings h...

Power of Attorney holder can also file cheque bounce cases: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that a criminal complaint in a cheque bounce case can be filed and pursued by a person who holds a power of attorney (PoA) on behalf of the complainant. A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice P Sathasivam gave the "authoritative" pronouncement on the issue, referred to it by a division bench in view of conflicting judgements of some high courts and the apex court. "We are of the view that the power of attorney holder may be allowed to file, appear and depose for the purpose of issue of process for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (which deals with cheque bounce cases)," the bench, also comprising justices Ranjana Prakash Desai and Ranjan Gogoi, said. The bench, in its judgement, said, "...we clarify the position and answer the questions in the following manner: "Filing of complaint petition under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act through PoA holder is perfectly legal...

Christian who reconverts as Hindu SC will get quota benefits

Amid the controversy over “ghar wapsi”, the Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that a person who “reconverts” from Christianity to Hinduism shall be entitled to reservation benefits if his forefathers belonged to a Scheduled Caste and the community accepts him after “reconversion”. Citing articles by B R Ambedkar and James Massey, and reports by Mandal Commission and Chinappa Commission, the court said: “There has been detailed study to indicate the Scheduled Caste persons belonging to Hindu religion, who had embraced Christianity with some kind of hope or aspiration, have remained socially, educationally and economically backward.” The bench of Justices Dipak Misra and V Gopala Gowda held that a person shall not be deprived of reservation benefits if he decides to “reconvert” to Hinduism and adopts the caste that his forefathers originally belonged to just because he was born to Christian parents or has a Christian spouse. Expanding the scope of a previous Constitution benc...