Per Mr.B.S.Wasekar, Hon’ble President
1) The present complaint has been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. According to the complainant, her husband th May, 2011 in Motor vehicle accident. She submitted insurance claim under the Government scheme of Shetkari Apghat Vima Yojana. Her claim was not satisfied therefore she has filed this complaint for insurance claim of Rs.1 Lakh with interest.
2) The opponent appeared and filed written statement. It is submitted that, the claim was not received by the opponent within time limit. Therefore claim could not be settled. The contents of complaint are denied for want of knowledge. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opponent therefore the complaint is liable to be dismissed with cost.
3) Opponent no.2 filed written statement and submitted that, claim was not received by this opponent. The opponent no.3 did not appear in spite of service. Therefore, the matter was heard in the absence of opponent no.3.
4) After hearing all the parties and after going through the record, following points arise for our consideration.
POINTS
Sr. No. | Points | Findings |
1) | Whether there is deficiency in service ? | Yes |
2) | Whether the complainant is entitled for the relief as claimed ? | Yes |
3) | What Order ? | As per final order |
REASONS
5) As to Point No.1 & 2 :- The complainant has produced revenue record, showing that her husband was holding agricultural land and he was farmer. The complainant also produced copies of F.I.R., Spot Panchanama, Inquest Panchanama and Death Certificate. On going through all these papers, it is clear that husband of the complainant died in Motor vehicle accident. According to opponent the claim was not submitted. On the other hand, it is submitted by the complainant that, the claim was submitted within time limit as per Government Circular and the copy of claim form along with Postal receipt and acknowledgement is produced on record. The complainant also issued notice but the same was not replied.
6) The death is not disputed. The claim was repudiated as it was not submitted within time limit. The learned advocate for the Opponent has placed reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble National Commission reported in 1994(1) CPR 108 in the case of Jewellers Narandas & Husbands –Versus- The Oriental Insurance Company Limited, decided on 16th December, 1993. In para 5 of the judgment, the Hon’ble National Commission has laid down as under :
Annexure R-V is a communication that gives detailed reahusbands in support of the decision taken by the insurer to repudiate the claim and it cannot be said that the said decision was taken arbitrarily and without due application of mind of the relevant facts and circumstances or otherwise than in good faith. Such being the position, we have no hesitation to hold that there was no deficiency in service on the part of the Insurance Company so as to entitle the complainant to seek relief under the Consumer Protection Act. In case the complainant feels aggrieved by the action of the Insurance Company in repudiating its claim, the remedy of the complainant to approach the ordinary Civil Court for appropriate relief.
In that judgment detailed reasons were given for repudiating the claim. In the instant complaint before us, there is nothing on record to show that, the complainant was informed to submit required documents. In fact, as per Government Resolution, it is the liability of the government office to submit all the necessary documents. On their failure, the complainant who is the beneficiary should not be suffered. Therefore, the abovecited judgment is not applicable in this case. Similar view is taken in other judgment of the Hon’ble National Commission reported in 1986-96 National Commission and SC page 3060 in the case of B.L.Agarwal –Versus- National Insurance Company Limited decided on 21st October, 1993.
7) The learned advocate for the complainant has placed reliance on the judgment of our State Commission reported in 2008(2) All MR (Journal) 13 in the case of ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited –Versus- Smt.Sindhubai Khanderao Khairnar, decided on 7th January, 2008. In para 9 of the judgment, the Hon’ble State Commission has observed as under :
The Government declares various benevolent schemes for Agriculturists and perhusband coming from lower strata of society. For effective implementation of the claim, Govt. prescribed simple procedure. Taking into consideration, the illiteracy in the rural areas, the liability is imposed on the Village Revenue Officer and Tahsildar for purpose of collection of necessary documents and submission of the claim to the insurance company. The success of benevolent scheme depends as to how and in what manner such schemes are implemented. Unfortunately, because of lukewarm and obstructive attitude of insurance company, genuine and honest claim of widow is defeated for no fault of her.
In the instant complaint before us also, claim form was immediately submitted to the government officer. The complainant has produced copy of claim form along with Postal receipt and acknowledgement. He has also produced notice along with postal acknowledgment. There is no reply or repudiation.
8) Thus, there is sufficient evidence on record to show that, deceased was the farmer holding agricultural land. He died accidentally. The complainant is a wife therefore, as per agreement, the opponent is liable to satisfy the claim of the complainant. The complainant has complied all the formalities as required under agreement and Government Resolution. Therefore the opponent is liable to pay the claim of the complainant. Hence, we proceed to pass the following order.
ORDER
1.Complaint is allowed.
2.The opponent is directed to pay Rs.1,00,000/- (Rs.One Lakh Only) to the complainant with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint i.e. 13th August,2014 till its realization.
3.The opponent is further directed to pay Rs.5,000/- (Rs.Five Thousand Only) to the complainant as cost of this proceeding.
4.The above order shall be complied with within a period of one month from today.
5.Copies of this order be sent to the parties free of cost.
Pronounced on 25th October, 2016
