HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
Mahendar Kumar Goyal, J.
Iffco-tokio General Insurance Company Limited – Appellant
Versus
Surabhi Jain – Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11179/2021 Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11180/2021
Decided On : 11-11-2022
Insurance - Covid-19 Claims - The court found that the claimants were entitled to the insured sum as they were hospitalized for more than 72 hours due to Covid-19, based on the findings of the Insurance Ombudsman and medical documents submitted.
Fact of the Case:
The respondents' claims for insurance benefits were rejected by the petitioner-Insurance Company, leading to an application seeking vacation of an interim order.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the respondents were entitled to the insured sum as they were hospitalized for more than 72 hours due to Covid-19, based on the findings of the Insurance Ombudsman and medical documents submitted. The court modified the interim order and directed the petitioner to pay 50% of the award amount along with interest.
Issues: Rejection of insurance claims, entitlement to insured sum, vacation of interim order
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the findings of the Insurance Ombudsman and the medical documents submitted by the respondents to determine their entitlement to the insured sum.
Final Decision: The court partly allowed the application and directed the petitioner to pay 50% of the award amount along with interest to the respondents.
JUDGMENT
1. In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11179/2021:-
2. The matter comes up on an application (2/2022) filed by the respondent seeking vacation of ex parte interim order dated 27.10.2021.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that her claim was rejected by the petitioner-Insurance Company in an illegal manner travelling beyond the terms of insurance policy issued to her. Inviting attention of this Court towards the award dated 22.06.2021 passed by the Insurance Ombudsman, learned counsel submits that it is based on appreciation of the evidence on record and suffers from no perversity. He submits that from the documents placed by her on record alongwith her reply, it is established that she was admitted in the hospital for a period of more than 72 hours on account of being inflicted with Covid-19 and hence, was entitled for the insured sum. He, therefore, prays that the application be allowed and interim order of this Court dated 27.10.2021 be vacated.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that its investigator has, after thorough investigation, found the claim of the respondent to be false. He submits that in identical cases, the Insurance Ombudsman has dismissed the complaints. He, however, did not dispute that the documents appended with the reply were part of claim form submitted by the respondent with it. He, therefore, prays for dismissal of the application.
5. Heard. Considered.
6. As per the findings recorded by the Insurance Ombudsman in the award impugned dated 22.06.2021, the respondent was inflicted with Covid-19 infection and remained hospitalized for a continuous period of more than 72 hours. It has also been observed therein that it was not disputed by the Insurance Company that RT-PCR test of the respondent conducted by the Medical Department, Government of Rajasthan, substantiated infliction of the respondent with Covid-19. From the medical documents appended by the respondent alongwith her reply, this Court is prima facie satisfied that the respondent was suffering from Covid-19 and remained hospitalized.
7. In view of the aforesaid, this Court deems it just and proper to partly allow the application. The order dated 27.10.2021 is modified and it is directed that the petitioner shall pay to the respondent 50% of the award amount alongwith interest within a period of four weeks from today on her furnishing an undertaking to refund the same alongwith interest admissible in case the writ petition succeeds.
8. In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11180/2021:-
9. The matter comes up on an application (2/2022) filed by the respondents seeking vacation of ex parte interim order dated 27.10.2021.
10. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that their claim was rejected by the petitioner-Insurance Company in an illegal manner travelling beyond the terms of insurance policy issued to them. Inviting attention of this Court towards the award dated 22.06.2021 passed by the Insurance Ombudsman, learned counsel submits that it is based on appreciation of the evidence on record and suffers from no perversity. He submits that from the documents placed by them on record alongwith their reply, it is established that they were admitted in the hospital for a period of more than 72 hours on account of being inflicted with Covid-19 and hence, were entitled for the insured sum. He, therefore, prays that the application be allowed and interim order of this Court dated 27.10.2021 be vacated.
11. Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that its investigator has, after thorough investigation, found the claim of the respondents to be false. He submits that in identical cases, the Insurance Ombudsman has dismissed the complaints. He, however, did not dispute that the documents appended with the reply were part of claim form submitted by the respondents with it. He, therefore, prays for dismissal of the application.
12. Heard. Considered.
13. As per the findings recorded by the Insurance Ombudsman in the awa
Entitlement to insurance benefits based on hospitalization for more than 72 hours due to Covid-19
The court upheld the Ombudsman's decision, confirming that hospitalization for merely diagnostic purposes does not warrant insurance reimbursement.
The Insurance Ombudsman acted within jurisdiction, and the Insurance Company must comply with the award, emphasizing accountability for delays and suppression of documents.
Exclusion clause for alcohol-related illness applies only if the disease is solely and directly caused by alcohol consumption.
The court emphasized the duty of disclosure in insurance contracts, ruling that claims cannot be repudiated without sufficient medical evidence supporting pre-existing conditions.
A writ petition cannot proceed when a prior award exists, leaving the petitioner to seek redress through appropriate legal avenues.
The court determined the petitioner's entitlement to interest on an awarded insurance claim under the Insurance Ombudsman Rules.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.