Death Claim - Gbic.co.in
Death Claim - Gbic.co.in
Death Claim - Gbic.co.in
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Lucknow Ombudsman CentreCase No. : L-114/21/001/06-07Shri Rupesh Kumar GuptaVsLife Insurance Corporation of IndiaAward dated 19.01.2007Shri Rupesh Kumar Gupta had lodged a <strong>co</strong>mpla<strong>in</strong>t with Insurance Ombudsman foralleged unjustified repudiation of claim by LIC of India under policy no.253185825 onthe life of his wife Smt. Anita Gupta on the ground that the fact regard<strong>in</strong>g earliercaesarian delivery was not disclosed <strong>in</strong> the proposal form by the life assured and thisaffected the underwrit<strong>in</strong>g decision of the <strong>in</strong>surer. If this would have been disclosed shewould have been asked to <strong>co</strong>mplete addendum to proposal form as well as to submitreport from attend<strong>in</strong>g Gyne<strong>co</strong>logist on form 3341 and also to submit haemogram report.Besides one of the causes of her death was Hepatic Encephalopathy and Hepatitis-E<strong>in</strong>fection developed dur<strong>in</strong>g her pregnancy. S<strong>in</strong>ce the claim has been repudiated with<strong>in</strong>two years from the date the policy was effected. The repudiation of the claim on theabove ground which was established by certificate of hospital treatment and theadmission of the <strong>co</strong>mpla<strong>in</strong>ant himself dur<strong>in</strong>g personal hear<strong>in</strong>g was, therefore, held tobe <strong>in</strong> order.Lucknow Ombudsman CentreCase No. : L-544/21/001/06-07Shri JitendraVsLife Insurance Corporation of IndiaAward dated 22.01.2007Shri Jitendra had lodged a <strong>co</strong>mpla<strong>in</strong>t with Insurance Ombudsman for alleged unjustifiedrepudiation of claim by LIC of India under policy no.283695944 on the life of his motherSmt. Durga Devi on the ground that she was suffer<strong>in</strong>g from Anemia and Renal diseasesprior to the date of the proposal but she did not disclose the same <strong>in</strong> the proposal form.However, no <strong>co</strong>gent evidence to establish the fact of nondisclosure of the disease wasproduced by the <strong>in</strong>surer so as to establish that <strong>co</strong>nditions of Section 45 of InsuranceAct 1938 were <strong>co</strong>mplied with. The letter of repudiation was, therefore, set aside andthe <strong>co</strong>mpla<strong>in</strong>ant nom<strong>in</strong>ee awarded full payment of claim alongwith accrued bonuses.Lucknow Ombudsman CentreCase No. : L-562/21/001/06-07Shri Nanhe Lal YadavVsLife Insurance Corporation of IndiaAward dated 22.01.2007Shri Nanhe Lal Yadav had lodged a <strong>co</strong>mpla<strong>in</strong>t with Insurance Ombudsman for allegedunjustified repudiation of claim by LIC of India under policy no.283592436 on the life ofhis wife Smt. Phoolwati Yadav on the ground that <strong>in</strong> the personal statement regard<strong>in</strong>ghealth dated 09.11.05 submitted for revival of the above policy the life assured hadsuppressed the ailments with which she was suffer<strong>in</strong>g prior to the date of the revival.The Insurer however did not submit any evidence <strong>in</strong> support of his repudiation actioneven although 15 days time as further sought by its representative on the date ofpersonal hear<strong>in</strong>g for the purpose had elapsed by a sufficient marg<strong>in</strong>. The repudiationletter dated 03.05.06 issued by the <strong>in</strong>surer was, therefore, set aside and nom<strong>in</strong>ee