The NDRF has begun a nationwide survey of passenger cable cars and ropeway systems to find out possible security flaws in them and to prepare a structural blueprint that will help it launch effective rescue operations in case of an emergency.
The contingency force has also decided to train its rescuers in specific ropeway rescue skills apart from purchasing an assortment of tools like pulleys and carabiners to be used for transporting the salvager and evacuating stranded people from the car hanging in the air. The move comes as at least four ropeway-related incidents, including one in Uttarakhand, have been reported in the country so far this year.
“The aim of the exercise is to not only sensitise the operators of this mode of transport about the precautions they should practice and preparations they should have, it will also give us an action plan which can be used during emergencies and disasters that hit the ropeway system,” NDRF DG Atul Karwal said.
IRDAI to look into rejected covid-19 claims
IRDAI agreed to look into the Covid-19 policy claims that were rejected by insurance companies.
This comes after a public interest litigation was filed by a Manav Seva Dham (petitioner), a social services’ trust against various insurance companies before the Bombay High Court.
According to the petition, it has been alleged that various insurance providers engaged in a number of offences, misusing policyholder funds, rerouting funds through additional businesses, and paying exorbitant overriding commissions to banks and their agents.
“The insurance companies are unjustly denying their Covid-19-related claims, it claimed, even in the midst of the ongoing pandemic Covid-19, in which the country’s residents have not only lost their jobs but also depleted their money”, it said.
Additionally, the petitioner submitted that Insurance companies have caused wrongful losses to the policyholders. Essentially the petitioner asked the court to ass an order to ensure that the insurance claims submitted by the policyholders due to Covid-19 pandemic were not arbitrarily rejected.
The petition stated that due to the widespread pandemic the general insurance companies received a significant lot of claims from the policyholders. More than 80, 000 claims were received by the non-life insurance industry. However, despite having health insurance policies, the claims of the policyholders were blatantly rejected by these insurance companies citing frivolous reason.
Further, it was submitted by the social trust that during the second wave of the pandemic the insurance firms settled only 54% of the claims received from the customers who subscribed to an additional Covid health insurance as of March 2021.
The petitioner argued that only claims totaling to Rs.7,900crore have been settled by insurers out of the total claims of Rs.14,680 crore under the Covid health insurance programmes.
The rest of the claims were arbitrarily been rejected without citing any valid reason or specifying the reason for denial or rejection of claims by referring to the corresponding policy conditions, the petition stated.
While on the other hand, only a handful of people got portion of the total treatment cost at hospitals as their claims from the insurance companies.
The social trust also claimed that it discovered that the policyholders were receiving just 45-80 % of the overall hospital expenses because they were embroiled in a fight between hospitals and insurance companies over the treatment of consumables. Despite having comprehensive insurance coverage.
More important, in terms of the year on year growth of the insurance companies under the head of advertisements were outrageous, the petition stated. The marketing spend of these companies did not actually correspond with the respective spend and reach of these companies.
The petitioner asserts that the marketing and customer reach of the insurance companies in the private sector do not correspond with their marketing spend, and the petitioner is concerned that these sums are being syphoned off by the insurance companies under the guise of advertising.
The petitioner compares the above numbers with a few of the rapidly expanding companies in India with significant revenue from operations and wider customer reach, such as Pidilite and Dabur India.
Insurer to pay for loss from stoppage to avert damage
BBF Industries, a Ludhiana-based company, had two manufacturing units for making cartons and packaging material. It had obtained two insurance policies from United India Insurance-one for Standard Fire and Special Perils with a coverage of over Rs 60 crore, and the other for Consequential Loss (Fire) Policy with a coverage of Rs 15 crore. Both the policies were valid from October 29, 2007 to October 28, 2008.
In July 2008, there was huge agitation against the government’s move to acquire land belonging to the Amarnath Shrine Board. There were protest rallies, strikes and riots, due to which curfew was imposed. On July 25, 2008 at around 10.30 am, a mob of around 200-250 persons armed with lathis and stones gathered at the factory. The mob started rioting, entered the factory, damaged property, and set fire to stock.
Due to damage to the units, the factory had to stop its operations completely. The disruption continued till August 31,2008. After the agitation subsided, it took another seven days to restore the plant, after which production restarted on September 8, 2008.
The insured lodged a claim, both for loss due to riots and arson, and also for consequential loss due to stoppage of operations. The surveyor appointed by the insurer assessed the loss under the Fire Policy at Rs. 1,42,88,101, and the claim was settled at Rs. 1,32,93,663.
The claim under the other policy for Consequential Loss was assessed only for a period of six days spent on restoration of the factory to make it operational again. The period prior to August 31, 2008, during which the factory remained closed due to riots and arson, was rejected as not being covered under the policy.
The insured wrote several letters regarding the claim of Rs. 3,06,54,018 for the preceding period from July 25, 2008 to August 31, 2008. As the insured filed a complaint before the National Commission seeking a reimbursement of Rs. 3,06,54,018 along with interest, compensation and costs.
The insurer contested the case, contending that loss due to closure of the factory on account of riots and curfew in the area could not be considered as an interruption of work due to fire. Hence it had rejected the claim for the period prior to August 31, 2008.
The Commission concluded that the claim for consequential loss for the entire period of 45 days worked out to Rs. 1,06,46,422, when computed according to the formula mentioned by the surveyor in the survey report.
Accordingly, by its order of June 1, 2022, delivered by Deepa Sharma along with Subhash Chandra, the National Commission ordered the insurer to pay Rs. 1,06,46,422 along with 9 per cent interest and cost of Rs. 1 lakh.
