Karnataka

Kolar

CC/24/2019

Sri.M.V.Munikrishnappa - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/s. United India Insurance Co.Ltd - Opp.Party(s)

Sri.T.G.Byregowda

28 Aug 2019

ORDER

Date of Filing: 19.03.2019

Date of Disposal: 28.08.2019

BEFORE THE KOLAR DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, D.C. OFFICE PREMISES, KOLAR.

 

Dated: 28^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019

PRESENT

SRI. K.N. LAKSHMINARAYANA, B.Sc., LLB., PRESIDENT

SMT. A.C. LALITHA, BAL, LLB.,  ……  LADY MEMBER

 

CONSUMER COMPLAINT NO. 24 OF 2019

Sri. M.V.Munikrishnappa,

S/o Munivenkatappa,

Aged about 40 years,

R/at Lakshmipura village,

Shettikothanur post,

Kolar Taluk.                                                       ….  COMPLAINANT.

(Rep. by Sri. T.G. Byregowda, Advocate)

 

- V/s –

1) M/S. United India Insurance Company

Limited, Divisional Office (071500)

P.B.No.30, NSC Bose Road,

K.G.F.

(Rep. by Sri. B.Kumar, Advocate)                             

2) The Manager,

Pragathi Krishna Gramina

Bank, Muduvathi Branch,

Muduvathi, Kolar Taluk.

(Exparte)                                                                            …. OPPOSITE PARTIES.

:: ORDER ::

BY SRI. K.N. LAKSHMINARAYANA, PRESIDENT

01.   The complainant has filed this complaint against the OPs and prays to direct the OP to pay the insurance policy amount of Rs.50,000/- of the deceased hybrid cow with interest at 12% per annum and compensation and allow the complaint.

02.   The brief facts of the case is that, the complainant had purchased cross hybrid cow in the month of September-2017 and the same was insured with the OP vide policy No.071584471P111808315, ear Tag No.390017/65/204 for Rs.50,000/-.  The complainant has also availed loan at Pragathi Krishna Gramina Bank, Muduvathi Branch, Kolar Taluk, and after two months the said cow got some ailment and the Veterinary Doctor has given treatment.  Thereafter unfortunately the said cow was died on 26.02.2018 at 05.00 PM.  The same was intimated to the Veterinary Doctor and the OP.  The Veterinary Doctor has conducted post-mortem of the deceased cow.  After the death of the said cow the complainant approached the OP to settle the insurance amount, but the OP pleaded that, the cow itself is not insured and not tallied with the badge.  The complainant has issued legal notice on 31.01.2019 calling upon the OP to pay the amount within 15 days, but the OP failed to comply with the notice and the complainant has filed this complaint against the OP and produced documents to support his case for the above set-out reliefs.

 03.  The OP No.1 appeared through his counsel and filed version contended that, the allegation made in the complaint are all false and the complaint is not maintainable either in law or on facts and liable to be dismissed in limine.  The Op No.1 has admitted that, he has insured the cross-breed cow vide policy No.071584471P111808315, ear Tag No.390017/65/204 for a sum of Rs.50,000/-.  This OP No.1 has further contended that, the said cow was died on 26.02.2018 and the same was informed to this OP No.1.  This OP repudiated the claim of the complainant on the ground that, the cow has not been insured with this OP and the Tag number did not tally and so also the photo of the living animal to that of the photo of the deceased animal are not matching and the said animal was died within weightage period.  The complainant is making misrepresentation before the Forum and the complainant is not entitled for any compensation.  The said complaint is false and baseless and there is no deficiency of service on the part of the OP No.1 and prays for dismissal of the complaint.

04.   OP No.2 was impleaded and did not appear before the Forum in spite of service of notice issued by the Forum and placed exparte.

05.   The complainant has filed sworn affidavit evidence by way of examination-in-chief and so also the Assistant Administrative Officer of OP No.1 has also filed his sworn affidavit by way of examination-in-chief.

06.   The complainant has produced thirteen documents i.e.,

(i) Copy of the letter dated: 21.05.2018 issued by OP-Annexure-1

(ii) Copy of the Live stock Claim Form dated: 23.03.2018 – Annexure-2

(iii) Copy of post-mortem Report dated: 23.03.2018 – Annexure-3

(iv) Copy of the cow value report – Annexure-4

(v) Copy of the treatment Certificate – Annexure-5

(vi) Copy of the Aadhar Card

(vii) Copy of the Veterinary Health Certificate – Annexure-6

(viii) Copy of the certificate dated: 01.03.2018 – Annexure-7

(ix) Copy of the Certificate dated: 24.06.2017 – Annexure-8

(x) Office copy of the legal notice dated: 31.01.2019 – Annexure-9

(xi) Postal Receipt dated: 31.01.2019 – Annexure-10

(xii) Postal Acknowledgment – Annexure-11

(xiii) 03 photos – Annexure-12 & 13.

07.   The complainant has also filed Memo dated: 26.06.2019 with copy of front page of Insurance Bond and so also produced Memo dated: 18.07.2019 with original bank pass-book issued by Pragathi Krishna Gramina Bank.

08.   Heard arguments of the complainant and OP No.1.  The counsel for the complainant has also filed written arguments.

09.   Now the points that do arise for our consideration are that:-

1. Whether the complainant has proved deficiency in service on the part of the OPs and the complainant is entitled for the reliefs as prayed by him?

 

2. What order?

 

10.   Our findings on the above stated points are:-

POINT No.1:-   In the Affirmative as

                        As against OP No.1.

       

POINT No.2:-   As per the final order

for the following:-

REASONS

POINT No.1:-

11.   We have perused the complaint, version, affidavit evidence of the complainant and OP No.1 and the documents produced by the complainant and the written arguments submitted by the complainant. 

12.   On perusal of the pleadings it is an admitted fact that, the complainant had purchased the cross-breed cow during September-2017 and the said cow was insured with OP No.1 vide policy No.071584471P111808315, Ear Tag No.390017/65/204 for Rs.50,000/- and the said cow was died on 26.02.2018.  The complainant has produced copy of the 1^st page of the policy bond through Memo dated: 26.06.2019.  On perusal of the said policy bond it reveals that, the said policy is for the period from 18.11.2017 to 17.11.2018 and the said policy was in force on the date of the death of the alleged cow.  The complainant has also produced repudiation letter of OP No.1 as per Annexure-1, Copy of Description of Animal Claim Form as per Annexure-2, Copy of Post-mortem report as per Annexure-3, copy of certificate of value of the cow as per Annexure-4, copy of treatment certificate as per Annexure-5, copy of veterinary health certificate as per Annexure-6 and certificate issued by the Medical Officer, Veterinary Hospital, Kolar, as per Annexure-7.  The said alleged cow was died on 26.02.2018 at 05.00 PM and in that regard, the Veterinary Doctor has inspected the said cow and given post-mortem report as per Annexure-3 and so also produced 03 photo of the alleged cross-breed cow as per Annexures-12 and 13.  The above said material facts and the documents produced by the complainant i.e., Annexure-1 to 7, Annexure-12 to 13 and copy of the insurance policy bond are supported the case of the complainant. 

13.   On the other hand, the OP has specifically contended that, the cow has not been insured with the OP and the Tag number did not tally and so also the photo of the living animal to that of the photo of the deceased animal are not matching and the said animal was died within the weightage period.  However the complainant has produced two photos of living alleged cow and one photo of deceased cow.  On perusal of the same, the deceased cow and to that of the living cow photo are matching with each other with that of black and white patched colour.  The said alleged deceased cow is matching with that of the living cow as per Annexure – 11 and 12.  The OP No.1 has not produced any photo for mismatching the alleged cow.  Hence the contention of the OP No.1 that, the deceased cow is not matching with the living cow is not sustainable and it goes in vain.  Further on perusal of the copy of the policy, the Tag number found in the repudiation letter i.e., Annexure-1, Live Stock Claim Forum i.e., Annexure-2, Post-mortem Report i.e., Annexure-3, certificate pertaining to Estimation of the cow i.e., Annexure-4, the Veterinary Health Certificate i.e., Annexure-6 and the certificate issued by the Veterinary Doctor i.e., Annexure-7 are all tallying with the Tag number of the deceased cow hence the entire defense taken by the OP No.1 are all goes in vain.  The OP No.1 has repudiated the claim of the complainant only on the mere allegation that, the photo of the deceased cow is not matching with that of the living cow is not sustainable.  The OP No.1 has also not stated about the date of weightage period.  The OP No.1 has repudiated the genuine claim of the complainant on meager ground and it amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the OP No.1 only. 

14.   Now it is relevant to state here that, on perusal of the policy bond produced by the complainant through Memo dated: 26.06.2019 and so also the loan account pass-book produced by the complainant through Memo dated: 18.07.2019 it reveals that, the complainant has purchased the said cow by borrowing loan from Pragathi Krishna Gramina Bank, Muduvathi Branch, Kolar Taluk, and the policy bond also reveals about the name of the said Bank.  The said pass-book also reveals that, the complainant is due of Rs.57,531-48 paisa as on 29.06.2019 towards outstanding loan, but the OP No.2 did not appear before the Forum in spite of receipt of notice issued by the Forum and OP No.2 is placed exparte.  As OP No.1 has repudiated the claim amount without any valid grounds and reasons and it amount to deficiency of service.  Hence the complainant is entitled for the insured amount of Rs.50,000/- only.  The OP No.1 is bound to pay the said amount to the complainant.  Hence as discussed above, we answer the above point is in the affirmative. 

15.   POINT No.2:-

In view of our finding on Point No.1 and the discussion made thereon, we proceed to pass the following:-

 

ORDER

01.   The complaint filed by the complainant is allowed as against OP No.1 and dismissed as against OP No.2.

02.   The OP No.1 is directed to pay the insured amount of Rs.50,000/-, litigation expenses of Rs.2,000/- and compensation of Rs.5,000/- to the complainant within 30 days from the date of communication of this order, failing which the OP No.1 has to pay interest at 6% per annum on the insured amount from the date of filing of the complaint till realization.

03.   Send a copy of this order to both parties free of cost.

(Dictated to the Stenographer, transcribed by him, corrected and then pronounced by us on this 28^th DAY OF AUGUST 2019)

 

 

 

   LADY MEMBER                            PRESIDENT