BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 103 of 2020
Date of Institution : 19.02.2020.
Date of Decision : 10.10.2022.
Ishwar Singh aged about 56 years son of Sh. Girdhari Lal, resident of village Chadiwal, The. Nathusari Chopta, District Sirsa.
……Complainant.
Versus.
1. Future Generali India Insurance Company Limited, 1stFloor, Plot No. 401-402, Model Town, Delhi Road, Rohtak, Tehsil and District Rohtak, through its authorizes signatory.
2. Sarva Haryana Gramin Bank, Branch Office Sahuwala-II, Teh. Nathusari Chopta Distt. Sirsa, through its Branch Manager.
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
Before: SH. PADAM SINGH THAKUR …………PRESIDENT
MRS.SUKHDEEP KAUR………………MEMBER.
SH. OM PARKASH TUTEJA ………… MEMBER
Present: Sh. Anjani Kumat Gupta, Advocate for complainant.
Opposite party no.1 already exparte.
Sh. S.L. Sachdeva, Advocate for opposite party no.2.
ORDER
The present complaint has been filed by complainant against the opposite parties (hereinafter referred as OPs) for the indemnification of claim on account of death of buffalo of complainant.
2. In brief, the case of the complainant is that complainant purchased six buffaloes for his livelihood. Out of six buffaloes, he purchased two buffalos for an amount of Rs.1,30,000/- and availed loan facility from op no.2. The complainant got insured the above said six buffaloes from op no.1 under Cattle and Livestock Insurance Policy Schedule through op no.2 every year and op no.1 issued Tag Nos. ZO-853521, ZO-853322, ZO-853324, ZO-853424, ZO-853323 and ZO-853520 for the buffaloes of complainant. That complainant also got insured the above said six buffaloes vide policy No. 2019-M-1233640-CTI valid from 18.01.2019 to 17.01.2020 for total premium of Rs.8775/- The amount of insurance premium was deducted from the account of complainant and was deposited with op no.1. It is further averred that on 12.08.2019, out of the above said six buffaloes, the buffalo bearing Tag No. 853521 suddenly died. The complainant soon after death of buffalo moved an application to the ops and also got conducted post mortem examination of said buffalo from Veterinary Surgeon, Government Veterinary Hospital, Darba Kalan (Sirsa) vide Sr. No. 13256 dated 14.08.2019 and as per the post mortem report, the cause of death of buffalo was due to acute Tympany. The complainant also took the photographs of dead buffalo.
3. It is further averred that complainant applied for insurance amount on account of death of insured buffalo bearing Tag No. 853521 and submitted all the necessary documents to the ops within time, but the insurance claim of complainant has been repudiated by op no.1 without any notice and reason with the remarks that “Ear tag cut in two pieces, there is no clarification provided in died cattle photograph, complete body of cattle not visible” though the ear tag of buffalo is intact and visible. That buffalo of complainant was of best bread and was giving 10 to 12 kgs. milk daily and as such complainant is also suffering loss of Rs.500/- to Rs.600/- per day and he is also entitled to the same from ops. The complainant is legally entitled to the amount under the policy and ops are jointly and severally liable to make payment of insurance claim. It is further averred that op no.1 has failed to make the payment of claim amounting to Rs.65,000/- and as such he is entitled to the said amount alongwith interest @18% per annum from the date of death of buffalo till final realization of amount. That ops have caused unnecessary harassment and deficiency in service towards the complainant. Hence, this complaint.
4. Notice of the complaint was issued to the ops. Op no.1 did not appear despite notice sent through registered cover and after waiting for stipulated period, since none appeared on behalf of op no.1, op no.1 was proceeded against exparte.
5. Op no.2 appeared and filed reply raising certain preliminary objections regarding non serving of prior notice, estoppal, maintainability, no cause of action, suppression of material facts, jurisdiction, no consumer dispute, complaint is hopelessly time barred, complaint is bad for non joinder of necessary parties and that answering op has not charged any penny from complainant on account of insurance premium, hence there has been no liability of answering op to indemnify the loss of complainant, if any. On merits, it is submitted that buffalo of complainant was insured with op no.1 and it is the op no.1 who has charged the insurance premium and is liable to pay the compensation to the complainant in case of loss, if any. Remaining contents of complaint are denied and prayer for dismissal of complaint qua op no.2 made.
6. Complainant has tendered his affidavit Ex. CW1/A and copies of documents i.e. statement of account Ex.C1, letter dated 18.01.2019 alongwith premium receipt of the amount of Rs.8775/- Ex.C2, policy schedule Ex.C3 with terms and conditions, health certificate Ex.C4, receipt Ex.C5, applications moved to op no.1 and op no.2 Ex.C6, Ex.C7, post mortem report Ex.C8, email dated 18.1.2020 of op no.1 sent to complainant regarding repudiation of claim Ex.C9, photographs Ex.C10 to Ex.C13, adhar card Ex.C14, statement of account Ex.C15 and certificate of insurance Ex.C16.
7. On the other hand, op no.2 has tendered affidavit of Sh. Inderpreet Singh, Manager as Ex.R1 and copy of statement of account Ex.R2.
8. We have heard learned counsel for complainant as well as learned counsel for op no.2 and have perused the case file carefully.
9. Admittedly, the buffalo in question of complainant was insured with op no.1 vide policy No. 2019-M-1233640-CTI valid from 18.01.2019 to 17.01.2020 for the amount of Rs.65,000/- against requisite premium amount and tag bearing No. 853521 was issued to the said insured buffalo of complainant by op no.1. The complainant in this regard has also placed on file copy of receipt of premium of the amount of Rs.8775/- issued by op no.1 insurance company for insurance of six buffalos of the complainant including the buffalo in question bearing tag no. 853521. The complainant has also placed on file copy of Cattle and livestock insurance- policy schedule Ex.C3 issued by op no.1 insurance company to the complainant which reveals that six buffalos of the complainant including buffalo bearing tag No. ZO-853521 were insured by op no.1 for an amount of Rs.65,000/- each. It is also proved on record from copy of post mortem report of insured buffalo bearing tag No. ZO-853521 (Ex.C8) that said insured buffalo of complainant died on 12.08.2019 i.e. during the subsitence of the policy in question and the Veterinary Doctor in his said report opined that animal has died due to acute tympany.
10. The claim lodged by the complainant has been repudiated by the op no.1 insurance company vide its email Ex.C9 on the ground that “Ear tag cut in two pieces. There is no clarification provided in died cattle photograph, complete body of cattle not visible.” But however, in our opinion the op no.1 has illegally and wrongly repudiated the genuine claim of the death of insured buffalo of the complainant. The complainant has placed on record photographs of dead buffalo as Ex.C11 to Ex.C13 and from the photographs it is evident that tag bearing No. 853521 is intact in the ear of dead buffalo of complainant and complete body of buffalo is also visible in the photographs. The op no.1 has also wrongly stated in its email that ear tag cut in two pieces whereas ear tag was intact and complete in the ear of the dead buffalo as is evident from photograph Ex.C11 and its tag number is also completely visible in the photograph Ex.C11. Even, the op no.1 has not bothered to appear before this Commission to contest the present complaint and to justify repudiation of genuine claim of complainant rather opted to be proceeded against exparte. Moreover, from the record available on record, it is clearly established that op no.1 has wrongly repudiated the genuine claim of the complainant and said repudiation of claim of complainant is set aside. However, no liability of any kind of op no.2 bank is made out as it simply provided financial assistance to the complainant and got insured the buffaloes of complainant with op no.1.
11. In view of our above discussion, we allow the present complaint qua opposite party no.1 and direct the opposite party no.1 to pay claim amount of Rs.65,000/- to the complainant within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, failing which complainant will be entitled to interest on the above said amount at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of this order till actual payment. We also direct the op no.1 to further pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as composite compensation for harassment and litigation expenses to the complainant within above said stipulated period. However, complaint qua op no.2 stands dismissed. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced: Member Member President,
Dated: 10.10.2022. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Sirsa.
JK
