Does the qualifying words "may reasonably become" in a disability policy apply to a plaintiff?

The issue then is whether the qualifying words "may reasonably become" deny the plaintiff payment of the disability benefits otherwise payable to him during such time that he requires to become so fitted for any other reasonable occupation. To put it another way, is the plaintiff deemed during such time to be not disabled, or is he deemed after such time to be not disabled? Although a literal interpretation of the clause might suggest the former, the latter is more in line with the purpose of disability insurance. The cases clearly indicate that the wording of disability policies and plans must be interpreted not literally but reasonably, and that the benefit of interpretation is most often given to the insured. MacEachern v. Co-operative Fire and Casualty Co., supra.