Latest news with #GujaratStateConsumerDisputesRedressalCommission
Time of India
6 days ago
- Time of India
Age in voter list not legal document to prove age of policy holder: Consumer forum
Ahmedabad: The Gujarat State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has directed Future Generali India Life Insurance Co Ltd to pay Rs 35 lakh to the family of deceased Vadodara resident Ramdev Sharma. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The insurance company had earlier denied the family's claim, alleging that Sharma had misrepresented his age while applying for the life insurance policies. The controversy began when Sharma applied online for two life insurance policies in 2013, declaring his age as 57, supported by his PAN card. However, following his death in 2015, the company rejected the claim filed by his grandson, Shudanshuarya, stating that Sharma was actually 97 years old at the time of application. The insurer based this claim on entries in the 2010 and 2014 voter lists and the Parivar Patrak, which suggested Sharma was much older. In response, Sharma's grandson submitted multiple government-issued identity documents—including his PAN card, Aadhaar card, and election card—all indicating Sharma was born in 1957. He argued that these documents were more reliable than the voter lists, which the family claimed were inaccurate. After reviewing the evidence, the commission sided with Sharma's family. In its order, it stated: "The age of deceased life assured shown in voter list of 2010 and 2014 and Parivar Patrak cannot be said to be valid and legal document to prove the age of policy holder than the age of policy holder shown in PAN card, Election card and Aadhaar card on which complainant placed reliance." The commission further criticized the insurance company for mishandling the claim, stating: "We are of the considered opinion that the complainant successfully proved that opponent insurance company committed deficiency in service and unfair trade practice by repudiation of genuine claim of deceased life policy holder and as such, complainant is entitled to get the relief as claimed." Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Consequently, the commission ordered the company to pay the Rs 35 lakh claim amount along with 7% interest. Additionally, the insurer has been directed to pay Rs 35,000 as compensation for mental harassment and the inconvenience caused to the 123195420 413 |
Time of India
24-05-2025
- Business
- Time of India
‘Dead' man checks credit score, kills 26L claim
Ahmedabad: He was declared dead, mourned by family, and even cremated — or so everyone thought. But months later, the man believed to be deceased was quietly visiting hospitals and checking his credit score, leaving a trail that exposed a web of deceit. What began as a routine insurance claim has spiralled into a case that can put Hollywood scriptwriters to shame. In a shocking twist, a Rs 25.96 lakh insurance payout was denied after a private insurer produced evidence suggesting the 'dead' man was very much alive, dismantling a widow's claim and prompting the state consumer commission to intervene. The Gujarat State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission set aside a lower court order, directing an insurance company to pay Rs 25.96 lakh to the widow. The intriguing case unfolded in Gandhidham, where Sakshi (name changed) claimed that her husband Shamsher Singh (name changed), a transporter with 19 vehicles and life insurance coverage worth Rs 3.11 crore, had died in Feb 2020 at his native village in Sultanpur, Uttar Pradesh. A finance company was the master policyholder while Sakshi was named the nominee. She filed a claim under one of the policies, but the private insurer rejected it in Jan 2021. Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Todos os idosos deveriam ter um desse no banheiro! Veja só! Evite quedas e escorregões Saiba Mais Undo The private insurer rejected her claim in Jan 2021, and she approached the Kutch District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, which ruled in her favour and ordered payment on Feb 14, 2024. However, the insurer's appeal to the state commission flipped the script. Alleging that Singh died under unclear circumstances, the insurer appointed investigators in Gujarat and Uttar Pradesh to look into the matter. Their investigators found Singh had visited the OPD at Sanjay Gandhi PGIMS General Hospital four times between Feb 2020 and Jan 2021 and checked his CIBIL score at multiple banks three times after Feb 20, 2020 — all after his reported death. The insurer supplied documents to substantiate the claims. The insurer also submitted that residents of Sultanpur had not seen Singh's body and did not attend his cremation. The sachiv of Bariyaona gram panchayat, who issued the death certificate, said that Singh was cremated in Faizabad — a detail that didn't quite line up. The insurer also claimed the death certificate was forged. The state commission noted that the complainant's lawyer appeared once, but did not remain present during hearings. In its order passed recently, the commission stated: "We are of the considered opinion that this complaint involves serious issues of fraud, forgery, cheating, conspiracy etc. as alleged, which are very complicated and complex questions of facts and law and therefore, this complaint cannot be tried in a summary manner and these serious allegations are required to be scrutinised, verified and inquired through detailed evidence and examination and cross-examination of the witnesses. " The state commission termed the district commission's order "erroneous and unreasonable" and allowed the complainant to approach the appropriate court.
