Death Claim - Gbic.co.in

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Smt. Uchhab Kanwar made a complaint to this Forum on 22.03.2005 that Life InsuranceCorporation of India Jodhpur Division, has not paid Death Claim under Policy No.102911549. Policy was on the Life of Shri. Laxman Singh who was the son of thecomplainant.Hearing of the complaint was held on 14.11.2006 Smt. Uchhab Kanwar attended thehearing. Shri R.N. Meena Manager (claims) Life Insurance Corporation of India ,Jodhpur, attended the hearing as official representative. Life Assured Shri. LaxmanSingh , aged 20years expired on 27.01.2004. Policy commenced with effect from26.12.2003. Sum assured under the Policy is Rs. 30000/-.Life Assured expired due to congestive cardiac Failure in M.G. Hospital, Jodhpur on27.01.2004, within one month from taking the Insurance Policy. Life InsuranceCorporation of India , vide their letter dated 15.02.2005 has repudiated the claim onthe ground that the material information regarding health was not mentioned correctlyin the proposal form at the time of taking the Insurance Policy.As per the record of M. G. Hospital, Jodhpur, BHT No. 1233/E dated 26.01.2004,duration of previous illness has been mentioned as 10 years since early childhood.I uphold the decision of Life Insurance Corporation of India vide their letterdated 15.20.2005, repudiating the Death Claim.Complaint is disposed of.Delhi Ombudsman CentreCase No. : LI-JP/72/05-06Smt. Santara DeviVsLife Insurance Corporation of IndiaAward Dated : 27.11.06Smt. Santara Devi made a complaint to this Forum on 25.04.2005 that Life InsuranceCorporation of India Jaipur,, Division, has not paid Death Claim under Policy No.191785035 on the Life of her husband Shri. Dev Karan Mali .Hearing of the complaint was held on 14.11.2006 Shri Ram Avtar Mali relative of thecomplainant attended the hearing. Shri N.L. Moondra, Manager (claims) Life InsuranceCorporation of India , Jaipur, attended the hearing as official representative.Life Assured Late Shri. Dev Karan Mali, purchased Insurance Policy for Sum Assuredof Rs. 25000/-. The policy commenced with effect from 28.03.2000. Insurance Policywas revived on 08.09.2003. Life Assured expired due to brain stroke on 09.09.2003 atSaudi Arabia. Life Assured was not present in India on 08.09.2003 when the policy wasrevived and his signatures on the Declaration of Good Health were found forged by theHand Writing Expert. Life Insurance Corporation of India vide their letter dated02.12.2004 repudiated Death Claim on the ground that Life Assured was not present inIndia and was abroad as on 08.08.2003 which is date of Declaration of Good Healthand date of revival. Policy was revived with fraudulent intention by making forgedsignature of the deceased Life Assured on Declaration of Good Health.I uphold the decision of Life Insurance Corporation of India vide their letter Ref No.claim/D/Rep/48/191785035 dated 02.12.2004 Ref NO: claim/D/rep./48/191785035,repudiating the Death Claim.Complaint is disposed of.
Delhi Ombudsman CentreCase No. : LI-UP/211/05-06Smt. Mangla SreemaliVsLife Insurance Corporation of IndiaAward Dated : 23.11.06Smt. Mangla Sreemali has lodged a complaint on 01.08.2005 with this Forum that LifeInsurance Corporation of India, Divisional Office-Udaipur has not settled Death Claimunder her husband Late Sh. Manoj Shreemali under Policy No. 182591210.The Life Insurance Corporation of India Udaipur Office, has informed during thehearing on 15.11.2006 that they have already made the payment of Rs. 298456 videtheir cheque No. 352337 dated 03.03.2006. After receipt of payment the complainanthas lodged the complaint to Hon’ble District Consumer Forum Udaipur vide case No.32/06 on the same subject matter, hence complaint does not lie with the InsuranceOmbudsman as per RPG rules 1998, under 13 (3) (C).There is no further relief to be granted to the complainant.The complaint is disposed of finally.Delhi Ombudsman CentreCase No. : LI-DL-I/61/06Smt. R. SellammalVs.Life Insurance Corporation of IndiaAward Dated : 23.11.06My office has received a complaint on 17.08.2006 from Smt.R. Sellammal, against theLife Insurance Corporation of India, Divisional Office-I, Delhi, that Death Claim of LateSh. A. Raja under Policy No. 112380207 has not been settled by the Life InsuranceCorporation of India.Life Insurance Corporation of India, Delhi, Divisional Office-I, has informed vide theirletter dated 10.10.2006 that they have already paid the Death Claim for Rs. 68182/-vide their cheque No. 343338 dated 25.07.2006.In the circumstances, there is no further relief to be granted to the complainant. Thecomplaint is disposed of finally.Delhi Ombudsman CentreCase No. : LI-JP/72/05-06Smt. Santara DeviVsLife Insurance Corporation of IndiaAward Dated : 27.11.06Smt. Santara Devi made a complaint to this Forum on 25.04.2005 that Life InsuranceCorporation of India Jaipur,, Division, has not paid Death Claim under Policy No.191785035 on the Life of her husband Shri. Dev Karan Mali .Hearing of the complaint was held on 14.11.2006 Shri Ram Avtar Mali relative of thecomplainant attended the hearing. Shri N.L. Moondra, Manager (claims) Life InsuranceCorporation of India , Jaipur, attended the hearing as official representative.Life Assured Late Shri. Dev Karan Mali, purchased Insurance Policy for Sum Assuredof Rs. 25000/-. The policy commenced with effect from 28.03.2000. Insurance Policy
Page 3 and 4:
Repudiation of Claim for Payor’s
Page 5 and 6:
Award Dated : 27-11-2006Repudiation
Page 7 and 8:
The Complainant’s husband held a
Page 9:
sniped at Utmost Good Faith that fo
Page 12 and 13:
In view of the above, the decision
Page 14 and 15:
concealment of material facts regar
Page 16 and 17:
The complaint was registered and ne
Page 18 and 19:
he had never suffered from any ailm
Page 20 and 21:
from Chronic Hepatitis c Cirrhosis.
Page 22 and 23:
same till death claim arises. The R
Page 24 and 25:
adhikar ewam Rin pustika ” for Ag
Page 26 and 27:
10 days from date of commencement a
Page 28 and 29:
grounds of suppression of material
Page 30 and 31:
the claim for the reason “Suppres
Page 32 and 33:
It is observed from the Medical cer
Page 34 and 35:
It has also not been verified by th
Page 36 and 37:
disbursement of salary as reported
Page 39 and 40:
There was no dispute that the DD fo
Page 41 and 42:
proposal the contract remains uncon
Page 43 and 44:
the claim stating that her son bein
Page 45 and 46:
states that no common poison was fo
Page 47 and 48:
the Insurer on the ground that the
Page 49 and 50:
On perusing the documents it is obs
Page 51 and 52: application for insurance on 22.12.
Page 53 and 54: preferred a claim with the Insurer.
Page 55 and 56: the time of taking the policies. In
Page 57 and 58: in January 2000. The policy was rev
Page 59 and 60: Subsequently he was referred to Tir
Page 61 and 62: All the spells of medical leave hav
Page 63 and 64: In the hearing, the complainant sta
Page 65 and 66: KTVR Group Hospital due to “Hepat
Page 67 and 68: Chennai Ombudsman CentreCase No. :
Page 69 and 70: He was also on leave during 11.04.2
Page 71 and 72: Life Insurance Corporation of India
Page 73 and 74: Chennai Ombudsman CentreCase No. :
Page 75 and 76: found in the body. It was further r
Page 77 and 78: family doctor. He admitted that his
Page 79 and 80: Smt.S.Shanthi obtained a life insur
Page 81 and 82: act. She stated that as per the sta
Page 83 and 84: evival was almost like a fresh cont
Page 85 and 86: contended that the deceased life as
Page 87 and 88: Sri J. Hussain Mohammed submitted a
Page 89 and 90: and his wife was sitting after her
Page 91 and 92: In the hearing the complainant stat
Page 93 and 94: VsLife Insurance Corporation of Ind
Page 95 and 96: Jodhpur on 11.11.2002 and was disch
Page 97 and 98: He had concealed the material fact
Page 99 and 100: They further needed claim forms No.
Page 101: on life of her husband Late Shri. R
Page 105 and 106: The representative from Life Insura
Page 107 and 108: 3 months and 14 days of taking poli
Page 109 and 110: 09.06.2003 and the proposal was sub
Page 111 and 112: Leukemia. Bone Marrow Report dated
Page 113 and 114: Thus, he withheld facts and was gui
Page 115 and 116: questions provided in item no.11 of
Page 117 and 118: the claims excepting the present on
Page 119 and 120: The submission of LIC is that the p
Page 121 and 122: LIC that other two policies of Sum
Page 123 and 124: Branch Office of LICI. It is stated
Page 125 and 126: We have considered the photocopies
Page 127 and 128: On the circumstances aforesaid, it
Page 129 and 130: Life Insurance Corporation of India
Page 131 and 132: nos.722662607 for Rs.50000/- and 72
Page 133 and 134: information. The insurer also suspe
Page 135 and 136: The claim was rejected by LIC stati
Page 137 and 138: Facts of the Case: (Late) G.Appa Ra
Page 139 and 140: Head Notes: Life assured availed a
Page 141 and 142: in English, which suggest that he i
Page 143 and 144: LIC about usage of herbal medicines
Page 145 and 146: age proof. She requested for settle
Page 147 and 148: the owner of the opposite vehicle i
Page 149 and 150: action was found to be based on pro
Page 151 and 152: certificate issued by one Dr.H.R.De
Page 153 and 154:
suffering from disease prior to rev
Page 155 and 156:
establish that the LA failed to dis
Page 157 and 158:
The complaint under Rule 12(1)(b) r
Page 159 and 160:
not be blamed entirely. But, the mi
Page 161 and 162:
Life Insurance Corporation of India
Page 163 and 164:
hypertensive before the inception o
Page 165 and 166:
Ltd and expired on 30.09.04. Theref
Page 167 and 168:
Kotak Mohindra Old Mutual Life Insu
Page 169 and 170:
We may mention that the insurance c
Page 171 and 172:
evidence to prove that the DLA was
Page 173 and 174:
The insurance company in their self
Page 175 and 176:
time of taking the policy and that
Page 177 and 178:
the required papers and hence there
Page 179 and 180:
their own guidelines can consider t
Page 181 and 182:
the contract was not complete and e
Page 183 and 184:
and, therefore, she interpreted tha
Page 185 and 186:
cheque No.258433 dt.20.2.2007. Prob
Page 187 and 188:
We were unable to modify the order
Page 189 and 190:
certificates submitted by the claim
Page 191 and 192:
Smt. Phoolpatti had lodged a compla
Page 193 and 194:
dispute the will but contended that
Page 195 and 196:
Jaiswal who in their report confirm
Page 197 and 198:
treated the person but since the si
Page 199 and 200:
31.03.05/11.04.05 issued under the
Page 201 and 202:
Shri Sarvjit Gupta had lodged a com
Page 203 and 204:
complainant awarded payment of full
Page 205 and 206:
with him during the period 02.03.04
Page 207 and 208:
Award dated 31.02.2007Smt. Shakunta
Page 209 and 210:
asis of which proposal was complete
Page 211 and 212:
Consultation/Treatment as proof of
Page 213 and 214:
Smt Shantona Kanaiya Ghosh had take
Page 215 and 216:
ody with altered behavior for few m
Page 217 and 218:
Mumbai Ombudsman CentreCase No. : L
Page 219 and 220:
Diabetes Mellitus since 20 years an
Page 221 and 222:
Jhatingrao Gaikwad to pursue the ca
Page 223 and 224:
into consideration, it would be rea
Page 225:
Mumbai Ombudsman CentreCase No. : L
show all

Death Claim - Gbic.co.in

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?