A Hyderabad consumer commission has slammed Aditya Birla Health Insurance for wrongly rejecting a senior citizen's claim and cancelling his policy. The insurer must now reimburse ₹93,000 in medical expenses and pay additional compensation.

Key Takeaways

  • Aditya Birla Health Insurance ordered to pay ₹93,000 claim and ₹15,000 compensation.
  • Mandatory reinstatement of the health insurance policy for the 67-year-old complainant.
  • Commission flagged a total lack of documentary evidence to support the insurer's rejection.

In a significant victory for consumer rights, a Hyderabad consumer commission has held Aditya Birla Health Insurance guilty of deficiency in service. The case revolved around a 67-year-old man who had been paying premiums regularly since September 2018, only to have his policy cancelled and a claim rejected based on the alleged non-disclosure of hypertension.

The complainant was hospitalized in December 2023 for chest pain and shortness of breath, incurring expenses of ₹93,000. Despite the policy being in force for over five years, the insurer rejected the claim, alleging that the patient had hidden a pre-existing condition of hypertension. However, the man maintained that he had disclosed his health details during the initial medical check-up.

Read Also:CBI Files Charges Against Husband and Mother-in-Law in Model Twisha Sharma's Death

Why This Matters (BozokMedia Analysis)

BozokMedia analysis shows a growing trend of insurers utilizing 'non-disclosure' clauses as a loophole to avoid high-value payouts. This ruling reinforces the principle that once a policy has passed its 'cooling-off' period and has been active for several years, the burden of proof lies heavily on the insurer. It prevents companies from unilaterally cancelling policies without substantial, documented evidence, thereby protecting policyholders from corporate negligence.

"The inability of an insurer to provide a single piece of evidence to support a rejection is a textbook example of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice."

President Vakkanti Narasimha Rao and member P V T R Jawahar Babu noted that the insurer's defense was devoid of merit. The commission found it "highly objectionable" that the company claimed the patient had been suffering from the condition since 2017 but failed to produce any medical records to substantiate this claim.

Did You Know?: In India, the IRDAI (Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India) provides a strict framework for the 'moratorium period,' after which a policy cannot be questioned on the grounds of misstatement of facts unless fraud is proven.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Can an insurance company cancel a policy after several years?
Generally, no. After a certain period (often 3 years), a policy cannot be called into question except on grounds of fraud.

2. What is a 'cooling-off period' in health insurance?
It is a specific duration during which certain pre-existing diseases are not covered. Once this period expires, the insurer must cover those conditions.