Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.24 seconds)

Madhu Bansal vs Life Insurance Corporation Of India & ... on 5 August, 2020

11. Mr. Piyush Sharma Advocate, learned counsel for the appellants at the very outset has submitted that the controversy involves in the present case is squarely covered by the judgment of this Commission passed in case tiled as "Madhu Bansal Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India & another", F.A. No.42 of 2019, decided on 26.11.2021, wherein the appeal filed by the insured was dismissed and the order passed by the District Commission in favour of the Insurance Company was upheld. Learned counsel has vehemently argued that the District Commission had partly allowed the complaint without taking into consideration a material fact that it was not a case of any surgery and the impugned order has been passed contrary to the terms and conditions of the policy. Learned counsel has further submitted that the treatment of paralysis was not falling under the category of Surgery and the insured was not entitled for the amount which has been awarded. Learned counsel has further submitted that the District Commission has ignored the material facts that the complainant had not submitted all the documents at the time of submission of his claim. The benefits were granted only on the basis of the fact that the patient had remained admitted in the hospital for a period of more than 48 hours. It was not a mediclaim policy but still the District Commission had awarded reimbursement of all the bills incurred on the treatment of the insured. The claim had been allowed only on the ground that the complainant had remained 8 First Appeal No.202 of 2021 admitted in ICU whereas it was not a case of any surgery. Learned counsel has also relied upon following judgments in support of his averments :
Delhi High Court - Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 0 - J Singh - Full Document
1