Presented by Sri G.S.Pradhan, President . <br /> The case pertain to deficiency in service as envisaged under the provision of Consumer Protection Act-1986 and its brief fact is as follows:-<br /> <br /> The Complainant has purchased a cow being numbered as OIC/0519 on Dt.10/10/2006 which was certified to be a good health by the Veternary Officer for a sum of Rs.17,000/-(Rupees seven thousand)only from the supplier, Baldev Barik on availing loan from the Branch Manager, Utkal Gramya Bank, Gaisilet Branch, the Opposite Party No.2(two). The said cow was insured with the Opposite Party No.1(one) which was valid from Dt.16/10/2006 to Dt.15/10/2009. Unfortunately, the cow died on Dt.20/10/2006 and the same was informed to the concerned authority. Postmortem was conducted by the Veternary Surgeon of Gaisilet. After observing all formalities and with all necessary documents claim was made on Dt.16/11/2006 before the Opposite Party No.1(one) for the insurance amount. In spite of several approach made by the Complainant to disburse the claim amount the Opposite Party did not listen and remain silent. The Complainant suffered both monetarily and mentally for this in action of the Opposite Parties.<br /> <br /> Alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Parties, the complaint filed this case against the Opposite Parties and claims Rs.17,000/-(Rupees seventeen thousand)only, the insured amount and Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand)only compensation for mental agony.<br /> <br /> In its version, the Opposite Party No.1(one) denied to have cause any deficiency in service towards the Complainant and any cause of action for this case against this Opposite Party. The Opposite Party No.1(one) contends that after receipt of the claim form with some documents, this Opposite Party had taken all possible steps to investigate the claim and carried out all required procedures for settlement of the claim. An independent investigation Mr. K.L. Mishra, Advocate has also deputed by the Opposite Party to investigate the genuineness of the claim. The policy issued in respect of the deceased cow is subject to stipulated terms and condition agreed to by the insured at the time of making the contract and as such the insured is bound by the terms and conditions of the contract and the liability of the insurance company is governed by the terms of policy of insurance, “The company is not liable to pay the claim in the event of death of insured animal due to diseases occurring within 15(fifteen) days from the commencement of risk.” is one of the terms stipulated in the insurance policy. While processing the claim it is discovered that the risk of the policy commences on Dt.16/10/2006 and the cow died on Dt.20/10/2006 which is with in 15(fifteen) days of commencement of risk. So finding the claim being not covered with in the purview of the terms and conditions of the policy repudiated the claim on genuine grounds and intimated the Opposite Party No.2(two) vide its letter Dt.19/01/2007. The Opposite Party No.1(one) contends that, it has repudiated the claim after considering all relevant facts and circumstances of the case in good faith with due application of mind which can not be termed as deficiency in service on its part.<br /> <br /> Further the Opposite Party No.1(one) challenges the maintainability of this dispute in the Consumer Forum on the ground that the claim of the Complainant require in depth scrutiny and discussion of the term and conditions, their interpretation and application and can be done only in a regular Civil Suit.<br /> <br /> The Opposite Party No.1(one) prays for dismissal of the case with cost for instituting vexatious and frivolous complaint.<br /> <br /> The Opposite Party No.2(two) set ex-party.<br /> <br /> Perused the complaint petition, version of Opposite Party No.2(two) and the documents filed in respective of their case and find as follows:-<br /> <br /> It is not disputed that the Complainant has insured his cow under the Opposite Party No.1(one) which was valid from Dt.16/10/2006 to Dt.15/10/2009 and during the validity period of the insurance unfortunately, the cow died. After observing all formalities and with all necessary documents, the Complainant made claim before the Opposite Party No.1(one) on Dt.16/11/2006. The Opposite Party No.1(one) denied any deficiency in service on the ground that, the Opposite Party No.1(one) has repudiated the insurance claim as per proviso clause of terms and condition of the insurance policy. The term and condition of the policy is that “The company is not liable to pay the claim in the event of death of insured animal due to diseases occurring within 15(fifteen) days from the commencement of risk.” The risk of the policy commenced on Dt.16/10/2006 and the cow died on Dt.20/10/2006 with in the validity period of the policy, the Complainant is entitled to get the claim. Repudiation of the claim after the commencement of the policy on the ground of proviso clause of the term and condition of the policy is illegal and against the principle of natural justice. The letter printed in the proviso clause of the policy is so small that it cannot be seen and read in necked eye which shows the malafide intention of the Opposite Party company. It should be clear and distinct so that one can read the term and condition easily. The Complainant has bonafidely insured the cow to get insurance claim in case of any death of the insured cow, but the Opposite Party company has repudiated the claim after commencement risk of the policy has committed deficiency in service towards the Complainant.<br /> <br /> The Complainant has not been able to established any deficiency in service towards the complainant by the Opposite Party No.2(two) as such the Opposite Party No.2(two) is absolved from any liability. The case against the Opposite Party No.2(two) is dismissed.<br /> <br /> In the result, complaint allowed and ordered as follows:-<br /> <br /> The Opposite Party No.1(one) is directed to pay Rs.17,000/-(Rupees seventeen thousand)only the claim amount including 9%(nine percent) interest from the date of repudiation i.e. Dt.19/01/2007 to the date of this Order and Rs.1,000/-(Rupees one thousand)only towards litigation cost to the Complainant with in thirty days hence, failing which 18%(eighteen percent) interest per annum shall be charged on the awarded amount.<br /> <br /> Complaint disposed of accordingly.<br />