Kerala

Kasaragod

CC/11/325

Koppal Abdulla - Complainant(s)

Versus

National Insurance Co.Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

K.Shrikanthashetty.K. Kasaragod

04 Jul 2012

ORDER

 
Complaint Case No. CC/11/325
 
1. Koppal Abdulla
S/o.Late Koppal Abdulla, Garden House, Bengarakunnu, Nellikkunnu, Kasaragod
Kasaragod
Kerala
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. National Insurance Co.Ltd
High Lane Plaza, MG Road, Kasaragod
Kasaragod
Kerala
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'ABLE MR. K.T.Sidhiq PRESIDENT
 HONORABLE P.Ramadevi Member
 HONABLE MRS. Beena.K.G. MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

                                                                            Date of filing   :   26-11-2011 

                                                                            Date of order   :   28 -06-2012

IN THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, KASARAGOD

                                                CC.325/2011

                         Dated this, the   28th      day of   June    2012

PRESENT

SRI.K.T.SIDHIQ                                             : PRESIDENT

SMT.P.RAMADEVI                                      : MEMBER

SMT. K.G.BEENA                                        : MEMBER

 

Koppal Abdula, S/o. Late.Koppal Abdulla,                  } Complainant

Garden House, Bangera Kunnu,

Nellikunnu, Kasaragod. 671 121.

(Adv. K.Shrikanthashetty, Kasaragod)

 

1. National Insurnace Co.Ltd, High Lane Plaza,          } Opposite parties

    M.G.Road, Kasaragod, 671121 rep. by

    It’s Manager.

(Adv.Balagopalan, Kasaragod)

2. Good Health Plan Ltd,

    Plot No.49, Nagarjuna Hills, Panjagutta,

    Hyderabad. 82, Rep. by it’s Manager.

                                                                        O R D E R

SMT.K.G.BEENA, MEMBER

            This complaint is filed against the repudiation of Hospitalization benefits as per the   policy after the  admission for investigation and evaluation of the complainant  in the hospital from 29-07-2011 to 01-08-2011.  The cash less payment claim forwarded by the complainant through hospital before opposite party No.2 was denied for the reason.  ‘As admission for investigation and evaluation is not covered under the insurance norms’.   Hence the complaint for necessary relief.

2.         According to opposite parties, they were unaware of the diseases of the complainant.  Complainant never disclosed before issuing the policy that he had hypertension, Diabetes, heart problem and renel problem.  Complainant was undergone hospitalization only for evaluation and diagnostic purposes. Even after the evaluation and diagnostic  procedure  complainant had not undergone any active treatment. As per terms and conditions of policy expenses incurred primarily for evaluation and diagnostic purposes not followed by active treatment during hospitalization comes under exclusion clause.  Hence opposite party repudiated the claim.

3.         Complainant filed proof affidavit.  Exts A1 to A6 marked.  On the side of opposite parties Exts B1 & B2 marked.  Both sides heard and documents perused.

4.         Now the points arises for consideration are:

1.      Whether the repudiation of claim of the complainant amount to  any deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties?

2.      If so, what is the relief?

 5.         Here the complainant and his family are insured with  opposite party No.1 as per hospitalization benefit policy.  In Medi claim policy i.e  Ext.B2.  The complainant had hypertension, Diabetes, heart problem renel problem and was under medication and regular checkup.  He was admitted in KMC hospital Mangalore for evaluation and treatment.  The inpatient admission was from 29-07-2011 to 1-8-2011 as per Ext.A4.  But the claim Ext.B1 forwarded by the complainant  through hospital before opposite partyNo.2 was denied for reason “Admission for investigation and evaluation is not covered under insurance norms”.  So the claim is rejected through Ext.A3 relying on clause 4.10 of Ext.B2 which states that expenses incurred primarily for evaluation and diagnostic purposes not followed by active treatment during  hospitalization are not payable.  Ext. A1 is the payment receipt of KMC Hospital, Managalore.  Ext.A5 is the prescription shows that he was already under regular checkup and treatment.  Moreover opposite parties had a contention  that there is suppression of material facts on the part of the complainant regarding earlier diseases at the time of taking policy.  In National Insurance Company Ltd V. Ashok Kumar Gupta NCDRC CPJ P 547 it is held that complainant was guilty of non disclosure of material fact relating to his health under the heading “Insured Personal Details”.

6.         In Usha Sharma V. New India Assurance Co.Ltd  NCDRC  CPJ P 488 held that the policy cannot cover diseases which are not stated or are specifically excluded.  Insurance policy is a contract between 2 parties and its terms and conditions once accepted are binding on both parties.

            In the result, the complaint is dismissed with no order as to costs.

      Sd/-                                               Sd/-                                                Sd/-

MEMBER                                           MEMBER                                           PRESIDENT

Exts.

A1.1-8-11 photocopy of Payment receipt KMC Hospital, Mangalore.

A2. 30-7-11 photocopy of Denial of cashless access.

A3. Photocopy of letter.

A4. Medical Report of Attending Doctor.

A5.2-8-11 Prescription

A6.UGI Endoscopy.

B1. Claim Form.

B2. Medi claim Insurance Policy.

PW1.Koppal Abdulla

 

 

    Sd/-                                                 Sd/-                                                 Sd/-

MEMBER                                           MEMBER                                           PRESIDENT

Pj/                                                                                Forwarded by Order

                                                           

                                                                           SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT

 

 
 
[HON'ABLE MR. K.T.Sidhiq]
PRESIDENT
 
[HONORABLE P.Ramadevi]
Member
 
[HONABLE MRS. Beena.K.G.]
MEMBER

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.