Skip to main content

Insurer ordered to pay claim over headache treatment

An insurance company cannot deny a claim by saying headache was pre-existing, said insurance ombudsman. It added that no one could make any claim if that had been the case. The order was issued after considering a complaint lodged by a woman from Thiruvananthapuram, who was denied claim for the money she spent on treatment in a foreign country.

On her visit to the US in March last year, she was admitted to a hospital following headache due to climate change. She spent $315 (Rs 18,000) for two hours of treatment. She told the doctor that she often suffered headaches, which was entered in the medical report.

Before leaving for US, she had availed an overseas travel insurance policy from the New India Insurance Company. When she approached the insurer later, the claim was denied by the company saying the headache was pre-existent citing the medical report. Insurance ombudsman P K Vijayakumar said, "The third party administrator (TPA) who settles the dispute between insurance company and the consumer said headache was a chronic condition and cannot pay the claim. If that was the case, nobody in India could avail insurance". The ombudsman ordered the company to pay the claim.

 Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/kochi/Insurer-ordered-to-pay-claim-over-headache-treatment/articleshow/47902542.cms

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