Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

 

2. Brief facts are that complainant/petitioner took a Janta Personal Accident Claims Policy for Rs.5 lakhs from respondents no.1 & 2, through respondents no.3 & 4 for the period from 15.3.2004 to 14.3.2019. Unfortunately, on 29.9.2004, petitioner met with an accident and sustained injury in her spinal cord causing paralysis of her upper and lower limbs rendering her permanently disabled and physically handicapped. With regard to the said accident, information was given to Garhwa Police Station. Respondents no.1 and 2 were also informed on 7.10.2004. Thereafter, claim was submitted in prescribed format along with required papers/documents within the stipulated time.

19. Even on merits, we do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order passed by the State Commission.

20. State Commission in its order has observed ;

7. In the present case, basically two questions are involved (i) whether the disablement was caused to the complainant as a result of the accident dated 29.9.2004 ? and (ii) whether it was permanent disablement within the terms and conditions of the Insurance Policy ?

8. According to the Doctor, who had treated the complainant after accident in his certificate dated 3.9.2007 said that Dewanti Devi was discharged from nursing home on 8.10.2004 and was advised to continue outdoor medical treatment for curing paralysis. According to him, she had developed total permanent disability in her right upper arm and lower extremities. In the opinion of the said doctor, it must have developed due to persistent and resistant traumatized neurodegenerative process due to trauma. The said doctor supported his certificate in his evidence before District Forum.

9. The complainant also appeared on 1.11.2004 before the Medical Board for Handicaps and the office of Civil Surgeon-cum-Medical Officer, Garhwa issue a certificate to her, wherein nature of handicapness was mentioned as Paralysis of Upper and Lower limb of moderate category i.e. 50%.

10. In the present case, the policy benefit of 100% of the sum assured is available in case of Permanent total disablement. The parties are governed by the terms of the contract of the policy and accident benefit would only be available in case the disability comes strictly under the definition provided in the terms of the policy.

11. From the aforesaid medical evidence, we find that if at all the disablement caused to the complainant as a result of the accident dated 29.9.2004 affected only her right upper arm as well as right leg, which according to Dr.R.L. Agrawal was called in medical terms unpredictable paralytic status. Further as per the Medical Board the paralysis in question was of moderate category i.e. 50%. Hence by no stretch of imagination it could be said to be Permanent total disablement in terms of the policy. Hence, in our opinion, the complainant/respondent was not entitled to get the insurance amount. The disablement suffered by her did not come within the scope of cover provided under the policy.