Karnataka

Bangalore 4th Additional

CC/10/2297

Mr. Jayanthilal Jain S/o. Khimraj - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s . ICICI Prudential Trade Point - Opp.Party(s)

Sri. B. Maheshwara

20 Oct 2010

ORDER


BEFORE THE 4TH ADDITIONAL DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BANGALORE URBANNo.8, 7th Floor, Sahakara Bhavan, Cunnigham Road, Bangalore 560052
Complaint Case No. CC/10/2297
1. Mr. Jayanthilal Jain S/o. KhimrajNo. 2-3-4,1st Floor, Bheru Complex A. S. Achar Street, Mamul Pet, BangaloreBangaloreKarnataka ...........Appellant(s)

Versus.
1. M/s . ICICI Prudential Trade Point 1st Floor, Kamala Mills Comound Sabapazi Road Mumbai-400025. Rep by its ManagerMumbaiMumbai2. 2.M/s ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Co. Ltd Legal Department.4th Floor, Santhos Hoouse ICIC Venture Building Appasaheb Marath Marge prabhadevi, Mumbai-400025. Rep by its Manager.BangaloreKarnataka3. 3. M/s. ICICI Prudential Life Insurance Co. Ltd. Rep by the Manager ACR TowerNo. 32 Ist Floor Resedency Road BangaloreBangaloreKarnataka ...........Respondent(s)



BEFORE:
HONORABLE Sri D.Krishnappa ,PRESIDENTHONORABLE Ganganarsaiah ,MemberHONORABLE Anita Shivakumar. K ,Member
PRESENT :

Dated : 20 Oct 2010
JUDGEMENT

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

Heard the counsel for the complainant regarding admission of this case.   The complainant aggrieved by the denial of the cashless facility by the Ops has filed this complaint seeking compensation of Rs.2.00 lakhs with other ancillary reliefs.

 

        In the course of arguments, we find that the Ops though denied cashless facility to the complainant under the policy but in their denial letter they have made a categorical statement that the denial of the cashless facility is not the denial of the claim made by the complainant for reimbursement of medical expenditure after following procedure as provided under the policy.   Admittedly, the complainant has not made a claim with necessary documents to the Op for reimbursement of the medical expenditure.  That being so, the complaint in our view is premature and observed that complainant shall make a claim with necessary documents to the Op and Op in the event of refusal to reimburse the complainant may think of the course opened to him under law.   With this, complaint is dismissed at the stage of admission.

 

 

 


[HONORABLE Ganganarsaiah] Member[HONORABLE Sri D.Krishnappa] PRESIDENT[HONORABLE Anita Shivakumar. K] Member