This case coming on 05.12.2014 for final hearing before this Forum in the presence of Smt. D. Sujatha, Advocate for the complainant and Sri T. Veera Prasad, Advocate for the opposite party and having stood over to this date for consideration, this Forum pronounced the following:-
O R D E R
(By Sri A. Radha Krishna, President on behalf of the Bench)
1 The complainant sought payment of Rs.40,000/- for the death of she buffaloe and also damages and costs were not settling his claim by the opposite party for the death of his she buffalo though covered by the policy issued by the opposite party.
2 The allegations in the complainant in brief are that he purchased 5 female graded Murra Mulching buffaloes which is a milky black she buffaloes in Harayana State in the month of January, 2012. They were all insured with the opposite party for a total assured sum of Rs.4,00,000/- by collecting premium of Rs.16,200/- by the Joint Director, Animal Husbandary, Kakinada and was issued tags for the she buffaloes.
3 One of the she buffaloe bearing tag No. 1703 and No. 46250387367H138 died on 18.08.2012 due to Past Paternt Prolapu leading to shock. The Veterinary Assistant Surgeon, Veterinary Dispensary, Ravulapalem conducted PM and issued death certificate. He informed the death of buffaloe to the opposite party who deputed the surveyor and after investigation he submitted report. At the time of the investigation the surveyor failed to obtain the tag of the animal. When the opposite party officials demanded him, he immediately handed over the tag to the opposite party on the next day. Though he approached opposite party several times the claim was not settled. Thus complaining deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party, the complainant laid the present complaint.
4 The opposite party filed its written version disputing the claim of the complainant on the ground the tag bearing No. 1703 which was tagged on the ear of Carcass of she buffaloe was not issued by them and they issued tag No.46250387367H138 to the Joint Director, Animal Husbandary at the time of issuance of policy. It is only on 20.08.2012 the complainant informed them the death of she buffaloe and handed over the tag bearing No. 87367 to them which was not tagged on to the dead she buffaloe and it is only an afterthought the complainant produced the said tag bearing No. 87367. After the surveyor submitted his report subsequent to his investigation they rightly repudiated the claim of the complainant on the ground 1703 was not issued by them. Thus they sought dismissal of the complaint.
5 Now the points for determination are:
1. Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of opposite party?
2. If so, whether the complainant is entitled for the amount claimed by him in the complaint?
6 To prove their respective contentions both the parties filed their chief affidavits. The complainant exhibited 4 documents where as opposite party produced 3 documents. Ex.A1 is the policy schedule, Ex.A2 is xerox copy of death certificate issued by Veterinary Assistant Surgeon, Ravulapalem, Ex.A3 is xerox copy of PM certificate and Ex.A4 is claim form.
7 Ex.B1 is the letter addressed by the complainant to the opposite party claiming amount of Rs. 40,000/- for the death of she baffaloe tag bearing No. 1703, Ex.B2 is the report of the surveyor and also the photographs carcass of she buffaloe and Ex.B3 is letter addressed by the complainant to the opposite party.
8 As seen from the evidence letin by the both parties and also their respective contentions in the complaint and written version it is manifest the bone of contention of the opposite party is that they never issued tag No. 1703 but they issued tag bearing No. 46250387367H138, to the Joint Director, Animal Husbandary and the buffaloes which were insured were given tag numbers and two days after the death of she buffaloe the complainant handed over the tag bearing No. 87367 which was issued by them and they did not issue any tag bearing No. 1703.
9 It is no doubt true as seen from the documents on either side and also the photographs of carcass of the buffaloe a tag bearing No. 1703 was attached to its ear. Here it may be stated as seen from Ex.A3 the policy schedule, the policy was issued in the name of Joint Director, Animal Husbandary and in relevant column at serial No.10 the name of the complainant is described and thereafter the number 1703 is also mentioned. In the column pertaining to the ear tag tag No. 46250387367H138 is mentioned. Even in the letter under Ex.B3 the complainant categorically mentioned in the policy two tag numbers are mentioned and she buffaloe died and its tag No. is 87367. There is no dispute the complainant was in custody of the tag bearing No. 87367. It may be due to mistake 1703 is also pleaded as tag number because in the policy issued under original of Ex.A1 immediately after the name of the complainant 1703 is mentioned. For that matter even in the surveyor’s report he found claim of the complainant is genuine one and recommended for settlement of the claim of the complainant. Hence under these circumstances the contention of the opposite party is unsustainable. The repudiating the claim of the complainant is unjust. Hence it is clear there is deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. Accordingly this point is answered in favour of the complainant.
10 Point No.2: Apart from claiming Rs. 40,000/- towards cost of she buffaloe the complainant has also sought Rs. 25,000/- as damages and also other legal expenses. Considering the nature of the case and attending circumstances a sum of Rs. 40,000/- is awarded to the complainant and also sum of Rs.1,000/- is granted expenses. Thus this point is answered accordingly.
11 In the result, the opposite party is directed to pay Rs. 40,000/- [rupees forty thousand only] towards the cost of she buffaloe and sum of Rs.1,000/- [rupees one thousand only] towards expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of this order, failing which the said amount shall carry interest @9% from the date of this order till payment.
Typed dictation by the Steno, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us, in open Forum, this the 23rd day of December, 2014
Sd/- xxxx Sd/- xxxxxxx
MEMBER PRESIDENT
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED
For complainant : None For opposite party : None
DOCUMENTS MARKED
For complainant:-
Ex.A1 15.03.2012 Policy schedule
Ex.A2 Xerox copy of death certificate issued by Veterinary Assistant Surgeon, Ravulapalem
Ex.A3 Xerox copy of PM certificate
Ex.A4 Claim forms.
For opposite party:
Ex.B1 10.11.2012 Letter addressed by the complainant to the opposite party claiming amount of Rs. 40,000/- for the death of she-baffalo tag bearing No. 1703
Ex.B2 17.09.2012 Report of the surveyor and also the photographs carcass of she buffalo
Ex.B3 10.11.2012 Letter addressed by the complainant to the opposite party.
Sd/- xxxx Sd/- xxxxxxx
MEMBER PRESIDENT
