In a recent judgment, the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (DCDRC) in Navsari, Gujarat, delivered a significant ruling that underscores how digital-era medical documentation should be treated by insurers. The case revolved around a 34-year-old man whose legitimate mediclaim was rejected on technical grounds, specifically, the absence of a pathologist’s signature on digital medical reports. The man, holding a mediclaim policy worth ₹11.50 lakh, had been hospitalised in January 2025 after suffering from acute abdominal pain, weakness, and vomiting for three days.
Acting on his doctor’s advice, he was admitted to a private hospital in Navsari, where he was diagnosed with acute pancreatitis. His treatment lasted from January 11 to January 15, after which he was discharged. The total hospital bill amounted to ₹64,921, which he duly claimed under his health insurance policy.…
