DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BHIWANI.
CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 37 of 15
DATE OF INSTITUTION: - 05.02.2015
DATE OF ORDER: -20.01.2017
Anangpal Singh aged 58 years son of Shri Mahavir Singh, resident of village Haluwas, Tehsil & District Bhiwani.
……………Complainant.
VERSUS
- Chairman Haryana Live Stock Development Board, Mukhya Mantri Gramin Dhudharu Pashudhan Suraksha Yozna, Chandigarh.
- The Deputy Commissioner (Haryana State), Bhiwani.
- S.V.O. (Medicine) HVS-1, Vety. Polyclinic, Bhiwani.
………….. Opposite Parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 & 13 OF CONSUMER PROECTION ACT
BEFORE: - Shri Rajesh Jindal, President
Ms. Anamika Gupta, Member
Present:- Complainant in person.
Dr. Gopal Sharma, SBO on behalf of OP no. 1.
Shri Jaibir Singh, PA on behalf of OP no. 2.
Shri Vijay Singh, Veterinary on behalf of OP no. 3.
ORDER:-
Rajesh Jindal, President:
Brief facts of the present complaint are that the his buffalo was insured with OP vide receipt dated 06.02.2014 issued by OP no. 1 for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- under Mukhya Mantri Gramin Dhudharu Pashudhan Suraksha Yozna and he paid Rs. 100/- for registration charges, hence a tag was inserted in the ear of the buffalo. It is alleged that due to the tag in the ear of the buffalo, the teats of the buffalo got ailment and he spent about Rs. 2500/- on the treatment of the said ailment of the buffalo. The complainant stressed that the teats of the buffalo got ailment due to the tag inserted in the ear of the buffalo at the time of the insurance. It is alleged that he made complaint to the Ops but to no avail. The complainant further alleged that due to the act and conduct of the OPs he has to suffer mental agony, physical harassment and financial losses. Hence, it amounts to deficiency in service on the part of OPs and as such, he has to file the present complaint.
2. On appearance, OP no. 1 filed written statement alleging therein that the complainant has not come to this Forum with clean hands. It is submitted that the animals are insured with the insurance companies and to each such animal/cattle an ear tag is allotted. It is submitted that the if there has been any ailment as alleged in the complaint the same can be due to some other reason and not on account of wearing of ear ring. It is submitted that the complainant is neither entitled to any claim nor to any compensation on any count. Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of OP no. 1. It is prayed that the complaint be dismissed.
3. Ops no. 2 & 3 made statement that the written statement filed by OP no. 1 may read on their part also.
4. Complainant has tendered into evidence document Annexure C1.
5. We have gone through the record of the case carefully and have heard the parties.
6. The complainant in person reiterated the contents of the complaint. He submitted that his buffalo was insured with OP vide receipt dated 06.02.2014 issued by OP no. 1 for a sum of Rs. 50,000/- under Mukhya Mantri Gramin Dhudharu Pashudhan Suraksha Yozna and he paid Rs. 100/- for registration charges, hence a tag was inserted in the ear of the buffalo. He further submitted that due to the tag in the ear of the buffalo, the teats of the buffalo got ailment and he spent about Rs. 2500/- on the treatment of the said ailment of the buffalo. He stressed that the teats of the buffalo got ailment due to the tag inserted in the ear of the buffalo at the time of the insurance.
7. The authorized representative of the OP No. 1 reiterated the contents of the reply. He submitted that the complainant got his buffalo insured under the Mukhya Mantri Gramin Dhudharu Pashudhan Suraksha Yozna. The said scheme was published in the Haryana Government Gazette Notification No. 4865-AH-4-2013/15591 dated 20.12.2013. According to the said notification this scheme provides only risk cover for the mortality of the milch cattle duly registered. No other ailment or risk is covered under the said scheme. He further submitted that as per record 22414 animals were got registered under the said scheme and even there has not been a single complaint about any ailment due to the wearing of tag in the ear of the animal.
8. In the light of the pleadings and arguments of the parties, we have examined the relevant material on record. The complainant has failed to adduce any evidence in support of his contention that the teats of the buffalo got ailment due to the wearing of the tag in the ear of the buffalo. As per Haryana Government Gazette Notification No. 4865-AH-4-2013/15591 dated 20.12.2013, Rs. 100/- is charged only as registration fee not as a insurance premium. Considering the facts of the case, we do not find any substance in the complaint of the complainant and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. Certified copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.
Announced in open Forum.
Dated: 20.01.2017
(Rajesh Jindal)
President,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Bhiwani.
(Anamika Gupta)
Member.
