Dear Amar, 1. No doubt that the Judgment was passed in response of Writ petition, but it shall be applicable for every visually-impaired concerned. If I remember correctly, it was treated as a PIL as well. However, every wording of the ratio needs to be studied in a very careful manner. Therefore, I see no reasons as to why the judgment should not be applicable for all visually-impaired.
2. With regard to the second issue, I don’t think that this ruling applies to private bodies. As far as I know, and you’re also well aware, that writ of mandamus and certiorari can not be passed against private persons. 3. 3rd looks to complex to me and hence I’d left to other experts. 4. I think your observations are correct on this. 5. Well made suggestion. On 5/20/13, giri prasad <[email protected]> wrote: > Please share the link to download the circular. > > On 19/05/2013, Priyesh.C.U <[email protected]> wrote: >> hi!,requesting the same. >> >> >> >> With best regards, Priyesh.C.U, Assistant Professor, Department of >> Politics, p.m Government College Chalakudy, Thrissur District, Kerala >> & PH.d Scholar, School of International Relations & Politics, M.G >> University, Kottayam. >> Mobile: 09846141225 >> Email I D: >> [email protected] >> Skype I D: priyesh.cu >> Facebook: priyesh cu Follow me on Twitter: priyeshcu >> "Whenever there is >> Decline of righteousness, >> And rise of unrighteousness, >> I incarnate myself >> To protect the virtuous >> And to destroy the wicked, >> From Age to Age. >> Geeta". >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Kakarla Nageswaraiah" <[email protected]> >> To: <[email protected]> >> Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2013 9:42 PM >> Subject: Re: [AI] Views Invited: Legal issues in an insurance contract for >> people with disabilities. >> >> >>> Dear Madam, >>> If possible, please upload the PDF version of the letter to any of the >>> file-sharing sites. >>> Thanks and regards. >>> >>> >>> On 5/19/13, Sushmeetha <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> With reference to my knowledge, we don't have to pay any extra premium >>>> on >>>> life insurance if the policy is beginning from or after 2008. >>>> >>>> There is a letter signed by LIC for NAB to support this. Pasting below >>>> the >>>> content of the letter converted by OCR. >>>> >>>> Hope this helps. >>>> >>>> Life Insurance Corporation >>>> Actuarial department, Central Office,"YOGAKSHEMA", Jeevan >>>> Bima >>>> Marg, Mumbai-400 021. >>>> >>>> Tel:022-66598370/22852174,Fax:022-22028321 >>>> >>>> Ref: Actuarial /PS >>>> 14th July, 2007 >>>> >>>> Shri Ketan Kothari >>>> Asst.Director >>>> National Association for the Blind >>>> Mulla House >>>> 51, Mahatma Gandhi Road >>>> Mumbai 400 023 >>>> >>>> Dear Sir, >>>> >>>> Re: Insurance cover to blind persons >>>> >>>> We thank you for your letter dated 18th May, 2007 enclosing a copy of >>>> your >>>> earlier dated 13th March, 2007. >>>> >>>> Regarding the points raised in your enclosed letter we have to inform >>>> you >>>> >>>> as >>>> under: >>>> 1. It is not correct that we do not allow some of our plans such as >>>> Jeevan Anand, Jeevan Chhaya etc.to the blind persons. We do not have any >>>> restriction with regard to plan and term for the insurance cover. >>>> The only requirement is that the person to be insured should be >>>> gainfully >>>> employed which is one of our basic requirement for all whether they are >>>> disabled or not disabled. >>>> >>>> 2. It is also incorrect that Janashree Bima Yojana is not available to >>>> the blind persons. It is a social >>>> security group insurance scheme and provides insurance protection to >>>> persons >>>> below poverty line and marginally above poverty line provided they are >>>> members of the approved occupational/vocational groups. >>>> >>>> 3. It is also not correct that we charge extra premium while offering >>>> insurance cover to the blind persons. >>>> >>>> We hope the above clarification will serve the purpose. If you have any >>>> further points, please write to us. >>>> >>>> Thanking you again, >>>> Yours faithfully, >>>> Executive Director (ACTL) >>>> >>>> Best Regards, >>>> Sushmeetha B. Bubna │ Founder Director >>>> >>>> Voice Vision >>>> 103, Synthofine Estate,' A'- Wing, Off Aarey Road, Goregaon (E), Mumbai >>>> - >>>> 400 063. >>>> Work Phone: +91 22 40400000 │ Fax: +91 22 40400123 │ Hand Phone: +91 >>>> 9820566010 >>>> Email: [email protected] │ Web: www.voicevision.in >>>> Facebook www.facebook.com/voicevisionfans >>>> >>>> Challenges are what make life interesting; overcoming them is what makes >>>> life meaningful. >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: AccessIndia [mailto:[email protected]] On >>>> Behalf >>>> Of Amar Jain >>>> Sent: 19 May 2013 11:47 >>>> To: accessindia >>>> Cc: [email protected] >>>> Subject: [AI] Views Invited: Legal issues in an insurance contract for >>>> people with disabilities. >>>> >>>> Dear Scholars, >>>> >>>> I would like this discussion to be restricted to legal points, except >>>> when other points are equally important to substantiate the answers. >>>> If the moderator permits and other members have no objections, then I >>>> would love to see this matter being discussed on one other group which >>>> I think has quality experts to deal with the matter, and the group is >>>> We The PWD. So, cross-posting permission is sought in the matter. >>>> >>>> I have been through the judgment passed in the matter of Vikas Gupta >>>> vs. Union of India and Anr. when it was passed, and from what I >>>> remember that the judgment was passed in terms of postal life >>>> insurance in which the maximum amount with which the person with >>>> disability can be insured and additional premium being charged by the >>>> insurer on the ground of increased risk which can be incidental cause >>>> for insurer to undertake his liability in the event of any loss being >>>> caused were in issue. And from what I vaguely remember, the judgment >>>> was based on English authorities, as there was no case-law available >>>> as far as Indian judiciary is concerned. Though I don't remember the >>>> grounds on which the judgment was ultimately passed. >>>> >>>> Subsequently, the postal department issued the circular / notification >>>> (not sure what was issued), removing both the conditions. >>>> >>>> I will also be approaching LIC for a policy in coming months, and even >>>> my agent has told me that additional premium will be charged, and the >>>> seniors have also told the same verbally. I have not taken up this >>>> issue in my individual capacity yet with the corporation directly. My >>>> questions are as below: >>>> >>>> 1. The judgment did not settle the issue at once for all. As it was a >>>> writ petition (remedy for an individual), and it confined to the >>>> issuance of postal life insurance. So, though the judgment can be >>>> treated as a good precedent, and the ratio can be relied upon for >>>> arguing cases subsequently. But, can it be said to have binding effect >>>> on all? >>>> >>>> 2. Even if the answer is in affirmative, then on whom the judgment >>>> will have the binding effect? (Will it be restricted to those >>>> considered as state under Art. 12) or, even the private insurers can >>>> be brought under the realm of this judgment? >>>> >>>> 3. Apart from the grounds of discrimination and other similar grounds >>>> which are constitutionally available, and considering the fact that >>>> disability (except lunacy) is no bar when it comes to contracting >>>> capacity and insurance contract is no exception for us, how do we >>>> practically justify that disability will not affect the risk which is >>>> being underwritten materially in case of the happening of an event due >>>> to disability? >>>> >>>> Important: Can we say that in such cases the principle of causa >>>> proxima (the immediate cause of happening of the event) will apply >>>> while deciding whether the insured's claim is allowed or not? >>>> >>>> 4. Keeping the fact in mind that life insurance is based on human >>>> value concept, would other insurances be governed differently? >>>> >>>> 5. Lastly, in case of a mediclaim policy, can we say that the existing >>>> disability and its effects which may happen in general subsequently, >>>> be excluded and all other benefits be allowed? (In such cases, the >>>> effects should also be clearly defined when policy is being issued). >>>> This I think should be quite a good possibility. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Amar Jain. >>>> Website: www.amarjain.com >>>> >>>> Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility >>>> of >>>> mobile phones / Tabs on: >>>> http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessind >>>> ia.org.in >>>> >>>> >>>> Search for old postings at: >>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ >>>> >>>> To unsubscribe send a message to >>>> [email protected] >>>> with the subject unsubscribe. >>>> >>>> To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, >>>> please >>>> visit the list home page at >>>> http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in >>>> >>>> >>>> Disclaimer: >>>> 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of >>>> the >>>> person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity; >>>> >>>> 2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the >>>> mails >>>> sent through this mailing list.. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -------------------------------------- >>>> Ascent Networks Pvt Ltd, Mumbai, India >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility >>>> of >>>> mobile phones / Tabs on: >>>> http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in >>>> >>>> >>>> Search for old postings at: >>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ >>>> >>>> To unsubscribe send a message to >>>> [email protected] >>>> with the subject unsubscribe. >>>> >>>> To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, >>>> please >>>> visit the list home page at >>>> http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in >>>> >>>> >>>> Disclaimer: >>>> 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of >>>> the >>>> person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity; >>>> >>>> 2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the >>>> mails >>>> sent through this mailing list.. >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> కాకర్ల నాగేశ్వరయ్య >>> >>> K. Nageswaraiah >>> >>> Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility >>> of >>> >>> mobile phones / Tabs on: >>> http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in >>> >>> >>> Search for old postings at: >>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ >>> >>> To unsubscribe send a message to >>> [email protected] >>> with the subject unsubscribe. >>> >>> To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, >>> please visit the list home page at >>> http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in >>> >>> >>> Disclaimer: >>> 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of >>> the person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its >>> veracity; >>> >>> 2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the >>> mails >>> >>> sent through this mailing list.. >>> >> >> >> Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of >> mobile phones / Tabs on: >> http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in >> >> >> Search for old postings at: >> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ >> >> To unsubscribe send a message to >> [email protected] >> with the subject unsubscribe. >> >> To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, >> please >> visit the list home page at >> http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in >> >> >> Disclaimer: >> 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of >> the >> person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity; >> >> 2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails >> sent through this mailing list.. >> > > > -- > WITH REGARDS > > GIRIPRASAD > > MOBILE 924710000 / 9441133367 > > SKYPE giriprasad.maddina > > "Our greatest glory consists not in never falling, > but in rising every time we fall." > > Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of > mobile phones / Tabs on: > http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in > > > Search for old postings at: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > > To unsubscribe send a message to > [email protected] > with the subject unsubscribe. > > To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please > visit the list home page at > http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in > > > Disclaimer: > 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the > person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity; > > 2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails > sent through this mailing list.. > -- Akhilesh Dahiya, Advocate. Mobile: +91 9818798780 Email: [email protected] New Delhi Register at the dedicated AccessIndia list for discussing accessibility of mobile phones / Tabs on: http://mail.accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/mobile.accessindia_accessindia.org.in Search for old postings at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ To unsubscribe send a message to [email protected] with the subject unsubscribe. To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please visit the list home page at http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in Disclaimer: 1. Contents of the mails, factual, or otherwise, reflect the thinking of the person sending the mail and AI in no way relates itself to its veracity; 2. AI cannot be held liable for any commission/omission based on the mails sent through this mailing list..
