::BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, AT BIDAR::
C.C. No.65/2015.
Date of filing: 24.08.2015.
Date of disposal: 31.07.2018.
P R E S E N T:-
(1) Shri. Jagannath Prasad Udgata, B.A., LL.B.,
President
(2) Shri. Shankrappa (Halipurgi),
B.A.LL.B.,
Member.
COMPLAINANT/S: 1. Sunita W/o Late Veershetty Upar,
Age:45 years, Occ: House hold,
R/o Shirkatnalli, Tq And Dist: Bidar.
( By Sri.Sidramwshwar M.Shetkar., Adv.)
VERSUS
OPPONENT/S: 1) The Manager, Lifeline Life Care Ltd., Head
Office, Rainbow house, Savedi Road,
Ahmednagar-414 003(M.S.).
2) The Oriental Insurance company Limited,
City Branch Tarakpur; Nagpal Building
Tarakpur Road, Ahmednagar 414 003 (M.S.).
3) The Oriental Insurance company Limited,
Branch Office; Kamshetty Building 1st Floor,
Opp: Gurunanak Gate, Bidar-585401.
(By. R1.Written Version of post
R2 & R3 Sri.Rajkumar S., Adv.)
:: J UD G M E N T ::
By Shri. Jagannath Prasad Udgata, President.
This case is filed by the complainant alleging deficiency of service against the O.P.s on account of the denial of insurance claim settlement terming the death as natural.
2. This case was posted for judgment on 31.03.2016 but on closure scrutiny we observed certain discrepancies in the documents relied upon by the parties. While, we observed, in the inquest report, the I.O. before two witnesses has recorded about an injury on the right temporal region of the deceased late Veershetty, in the post mortem report no such injury was mentioned and the cause of death was described as “cardio respiratory arrest due to myocardial infarction”. We were at a loss to understand as to how the injury first observed by the police officer could escape the notice of the doctor conducting post mortem.
3. The crux of the matter was to determine whether the injury sustained on the right temporal region of the deceased and the trauma there of could trigger a myocardial infarction, on the facts that, there was no previous evidence of Heart disease or Diabetes in the case of the deceased.
4. Hence it was felt proper that, a request be made to the Superintendent. of Bidar Government General Hospital, to constitute a board of specialists, comprising experts such as trauma specialist, Cardiologist, Pathologist/F.M.T. specialists or any other specialists thought proper, examine the report of the Doctor of Mannaekehalli Community Health Centre and report back to this Court within forty five days opining as to whether , the accidental fall on a hard surface by the deceased Veershetty during the night of 06.11.2010 and there by the injury caused to the portion under right eye (temporal region) could have triggered a myocardial infarction leading to cardio respiratory arrest and death.
5. As the documents i.e. Inquest report ad P.M. report were illegible and obfuscated, the counsel for the complainant was directed to provide legible Copies of 174 Cr. P.C. proceedings and P.M. report for analysis of the Medical board latest by 05.04.2016.
6. The most unfortunate aspect of the case was, the complainant side could not produce the documents till 27.01.2018. In the mean time, by the motion of the complainant, summons and later witness warrants were issued to the Tahalsildar cum Executive Magistrate, Bidar to produce the relevant documents but due to apathy of the authorities, the presence of the officer could not be secured till the end. Ultimately, on 27.01.2018 , another set of documents (copies) were produced by the complainant and was transmitted to the medical Superintendent, BRIMS, Bidar together with the order date: 31.03.2016.
7. Once again, on 28.02.2018, the medical Superintendent BRIMS demanded a fresh legible copy of inquest and P.M. report which was provided to the court on 05.03.2018, and was duly transmitted to the Medical College. On 31.03.2018, report from the medical Board was received reporting that, the death was due to Myocardial infarction, without answering the querry as to whether trauma caused to a human on temporal region would trigger a myocardial infarction, i.e. death of the muscles and tissues in the middle level of heart.
8. The complainant not satisfied with the report, canvassed examining an expert and on his motion, the presence of Dr. Chandraprakash , Medical Superintendent of BRIMS was secured. Same doctor was subjected to examination by the complainants counsel by examining him as P.W.2 on 07.07.2018. He opined that, traumatic injury caused to a human body can trigger myocardial infarction. Owing to the absence of the O.Ps. side, the witness was discharged.
9. The uncontroverted testimony of the independent and expert witness clinched the whole issue that, Late Veershetty had fallen down accidentally on 06.11.2010 on a stone, sustained injury on the right temporal region which was the causative factor of myocardial infarction and resultant death.
10. In the instant case, the O.P.No.1 has sent a protest letter by registered post but has not chosen to participate in the trial. The opponent No.2 & 3 though belatedly got their versions into record by filing an I.A. and engaging counsels of their choice, the Advocates have vanished from the trial after inclusion of versions and perfunctory evidence affidavits filed on 17.12.2015. The complainant has led evidences of P.W.1 and 2 and has filed written arguments. Due to continuous absence, the O.P.s have failed to advanced arguments justifying their stands. Documents have been produced by the complainant alone, listed at the end of this order.
11. considering the claims and counters by the O.P.s the following points arise for our considerations.
- Does the complainant prove that, there has been deficiency of service in the part of the opponents?
- What orders?
12. Our answers to the points raised are as following:-
- In the affirmative.
- As per final orders owing to the following:-
:: REASONS ::
13. Point (1): As discussed above the death of the deceased policy holder had fallen on a stone, sustained traumatic injury on the night temporal region of the head, triggering a myocardial infarction and resultant death ultimately. Taking undue advantage of the omissions and commissions of public statutory authorities, the opponents are hell bent to deny the just claim of the complainant. We deprecate such actions of the opponents coupled with the none participation in the enquiry. Undoubtedly, misfeasance’s of the opponents are against public order and law of the land. None in this democratic Country would be permitted to escape from its legal liabilities promised to the poor and have nots, and in the process would be permitted to gain an advantage. Hence, we answer this points accordingly.
14. Point No(2): The death being accidental, established beyond doubt by the experts evidences the opponents are liable to honour the accidental death claim lodged by the complainant without demur. However, certain leniencies have to be shown to the opponents owing to the latches committed by the complainants’ side. We also deprecate the approach of the complainant side in approaching this forum with obfuscated documents resultantly pass the following:
ORDER.
- The complaint is allowed in part.
- The opponents are here by jointly and severally directed to pay the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (one Lakh ) the assured sum to the complainant as is evident from Annexure-A of the case;
- There would be no order as to compensation and costs due to complacency of the complainant;
- Four weeks time be granted to the opponents to comply this order, failing which, they would be liable to pay interest at the rate 12% per annum on the award amount calculated from the date of complaint, i.e. 24.08.2015 till date of realisation.
(Typed to our dictation then corrected, signed by us and then pronounced in the open Forum on this 31st day of July 2018).
Sri. Shankrappa H. Sri. Jagannath Prasad
Member. President.
Documents produced by the complainant
- Annexure.A- Copy of certificate of insurance.
- Annexure.B– Copy of application form raising the claim.
- Annexure. C– Original of the letter issued by O.P.No.2 date:
06.09.2012.
- Annexure.D—Copy of the letter date: 05.10.2013 by one
Sri. Nagappa along with documents sent on
05.10.2013 to the O.P.No.2. - Annexure. E– Original of postal receipt.
- Annexure.F- Original postal acknowledgement.
- Annexure.G- Copy of inquest proceeding in UDR No.34/2012 of
Bagdal Police Station Bidar district. - Annexure.H- Copy of statement of the complainant before Bagdal
Police date: 06.11.2010. - Annexure.J – Copy of detail investigation report of Bagdal Police in
UDR No.34/2010. - Annexure.K-Copy of Post mortem report in UDR No.34/2010 of
Bagdal Police Station. - Annexure.L- Copy of statement of Smt. Ishawaramma W/o
Nagappa Upar date: 06.11.2010 to the jurisdiction
Police Station. - Annexure.M- Statement of Smt. Sattemma W/o Chandrappa Date:
06.11.2010 before the Bagdal Police Station. - Annexure.N- Final report of Bagdal Police submitted to Tahasildar
and Taluka Executive Magistrate Bidar. - Annexure.P- Letter of one Nagappa date: 06.08.2014 in the address
of O.P.No.2 for opening of the file in claim No.4,5,3. - Annexure.Q- Office copy of legal notice issued to all O.P.s in
connection with the claim. - Annexure.R to T- Postal receipts.
- Annexure.U to W- Postal acknowledgement forums.
- Annexure.X- reply notice by the O.P.No.1 in the address of counsel
for the complainant. - Annexure.Y- Copy of the letter address to the complainant date:
04.02.2011 by the O.P.No.1 - Annexure.Z- Copy of death certificate of Veershetty.
Document produced by the Opponents.
-Nil-
Witness examined.
Complainant.
- P.W.1- Smt. Sunita W/o Late Veershetty Upar (complainant).
2.P.W.2- Dr. Chandraprakash S/o Shantalingappa Medical
Superintendent and District Surgeon BRIMS Bidar.
Opponent.
- R.W.2- Sri.A.A.Khan S/o Late A.G.Khan Divisioal Manager
Oriental Insurance Company Limited Gulabarga.
Sri. Shankrappa H. Sri. Jagannath Prasad
Member. President.
