Haryana

Jind

167/13

Balkar - Complainant(s)

Versus

NIC - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Manjit Singh

01 Jan 2015

ORDER

BEFORE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, JIND.

                                           Complaint No. 167 of 2013

   Date of Institution: 29.7.2013

   Date of final order: 5.1.2015

 

Balkar s/o Sh. Sat Pal r/o village Mandi Khurd, Tehsil Safidon, District Jind.      

                                                                    ….Complainant.

                                       Versus

1.     National Insurance Company Ltd. SCF 1-2 Rani Talab, Jind,

 District Jind through its Manager.

2.     Divisional Manager, National Insurance Company Ltd. Rohtak.

                                                                 …..Opposite parties.

                          Complaint under section 12 of

 

Before:      Sh. Hari Singh Khokhar, President.

                Smt. Bimla Sheokand, Member.

               

Present:     Sh. Manjit Singh, Adv. for  complainant.

                Sh. Vikas Sharma, Adv. for  Opposite Parties.

            

ORDER:

        The brief facts in the complaint are that the complainant   got his buffalo insured for a sum of Rs.50,000/- vide policy No.420605/47/12/9400002815 w.e.f. 10.1.2013 to 9.1.2014 and paid a sum of Rs.1250/- as premium. The opposite parties have tagged the buffalo of the complainant with Tag No. NIC6935 at the time of insurance. It is stated that on 10.4.2013 the buffalo fell ill and veterinary surgeon G.V.H. Mandi Khurd attended the animal and gave

                        Balkar Vs. NIC

                               …2…

possible treatment but on 20.4.2013 the buffalo of complainant died due to liver cirrhosis Hepatitis and Anorexia. The post-mortem was conducted  by the Veterinary Surgeon G.V.H. Mandi Khurd on the dead buffalo   on the same day.  The complainant informed the opposite parties immediately regarding death of his buffalo and submitted all the necessary documents.  The complainant lodged a claim with the opposite party.  The opposite party has wrongly repudiated the claim of the complainant vide letter dated 21.6.2013. The complainant visited the office of opposite parties several times and requested to give the claim amount but the opposite party did not pay any heed on the request of the complainant. Deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties is alleged. It is prayed that the complaint be accepted and opposite parties be directed to pay the insured claim amount of Rs.50,000/- along with interest @ 24% p.a. as well as to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- as compensation on account of mental pain and agony to the complainant.

2.     Upon notice, the opposite parties have  put in appearance and filed the written reply stating in the preliminary objections  that the complainant has no cause of action and locus-standi to file the present complaint; this Forum has got no jurisdiction to try and decide the present complaint and the complainant has not come before this Forum with clean hands and has suppressed the true real facts. On merits, it is contended that the matter of his claim was got investigated through an Independent and Govt. Approved Surveyor Sh. Sanjay Kumar Jain, who conducted the spot survey on the same day of death of buffalo i.e.

                        Balkar Vs. NIC

                               …3…

20.4.2013 and snapped the photographs of the dead body of buffalo. Surveyor submitted his report on 12.5.2013 who found that features of died buffalo were not matching with the insured buffalo as described in Health Certificate which was prepared by the Veterinary Surgeon at the time of issuing the policy. The surveyor made it clear in his report that died buffalo was having brown colour tail tuft, whereas as per Health Certificate the colour of tail tuft of insured buffalo was white.  The surveyor also made it clear that tag was inserted in the ear of buffalo after her death, because he has noticed that the condition of ear tag was very fresh and new.  So the claim of complainant has rightly been repudiated by the opposite party vide letter dated 21.6.2013.  All the other allegations have been denied by the opposite parties. Therefore, there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Dismissal of complaint with cost of Rs.10,000/- is prayed for.

 3.    In evidence the complainant has produced his own affidavit Ex. C-1,  copy of letter dated 21.6.2013 Ex. C-2, copy of document Ex. C-3, copy of valuation certificate Ex. C-4 and C-5, copy of post-mortem report Ex. OP-6, copy of document Ex. C-7, copy of test report Ex. C-8 and copy of live stock claim form Ex. C-9 and closed the evidence.  On the other hand, the opposite parties have produced the affidavit of   S.K. Behal, Sr. Branch Manager, Ex. OP-1, copy of letter dated 21.6.2013 Ex. OP-2, copy of survey report Ex. OP-3, copy of health cum evaluation certificate Ex. OP-4, copy of valuation certificate Ex.

 

                        Balkar Vs. NIC

                               …4…

OP-5 and  copy of post-mortem report Ex. OP-6 and closed the evidence.

4.     We have heard the arguments of Ld. Counsel of both the parties and also perused the record placed on file. It is a fact that the complainant had insured his buffalo from the opposite parties for a sum of Rs.50,000/- vide policy w.e.f. 10.1.2013 to 9.1.2014. The tag No. NIC6935 was inserted in the ear of insured buffalo. The above said buffalo fell ill on 10.4.2013 and Veterinary Surgeon G.V.H. gave treatment but on 20.4.2013  the said buffalo died due to liver cirrhosis Hepatitis and Anorexia. The post-mortem was conducted by Veterinary Surgeon G.V.H. on the same day. The complainant informed the opposite parties immediately and submitted all the necessary documents. The complainant lodged a claim with the opposite parties but the opposite parties wrongly repudiated the claim of the complainant vide letter dated 21.6.2013. The complainant visited the office of opposite parties several times and requested to give the claim amount but the opposite parties did not pay any heed on the request of the complainant.

5.     On the other hand, the opposite parties have averred that the claim of the complainant was got investigated through an Independent and Govt. Approved surveyor Sh. Sanjay Kumar Jain, who conducted the spot survey on dated 20.4.2013 and snapped the photographs of the dead buffalo and submitted his report on dated 12.5.2013. The conclusion of the surveyor is that on spot verification and matching particulars with health certificate, the dead buffalo particulars does

                        Balkar Vs. NIC

                               …5…

not match with the insured buffalo. The surveyor made it clear in his report that  dead buffalo was having brown clolur tail tuft, whereas in health certificate the colour of tail  tuft of insured buffalo was white. The condition of ear tag was very fresh and new. So, the claim of the complainant has been repudiated vide letter dated 21.6.2013.

6.     During arguments Ld. Counsel for the complainant produced a certificate of Veterinary Surgeon G.V.H. Pillu Khera vide dated 2.5.2014 which reads as follows:-

        ‘Health certificate of the buffalo of Sh. Balkar s/o Sh. Satpal r/o Mandi Khurd was issued by me. The buffalo was recorded in milk yield competition from 8.1.2013 to 10.1.2013. So, It was insured and tagged with Tag No. NIC6935.

        The buffalo expired on dated 20.4.2013. Post-mortem was done by me 4.00 P.M. Report was issued on 23.4.2013’.

It is clear from the above said certificate of Veterinary Surgeon that the Tag was the same which was fixed in the ear of the buffalo at the time of insurance. The Tag No. in the health certificate  Ex. OP-4 and post-mortem report Ex. OP-6 was the same.

7.     In view of the above facts and circumstances, we are of the considered view that the opposite parties have wrongly repudiated the rightful claim of the complainant. Deficiency in service is established on the part of the opposite parties. Consequently, the complaint of the complainant is allowed and the opposite parties are directed to pay the insurance value of buffalo i.e. Rs.50,000/- to the complainant within one month. In case of failure, the opposite parties will pay a simple

                        Balkar Vs. NIC

                               …6…

interest @9% p.a. from the date of filing of complaint i.e. 29.7.2013 till its full realization of amount. Parties will bear their own costs.  Copies of order be supplied to the parties under the rule. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

  Announced on: 5.1.2015

                                                                President,

 Member                              District Consumer Disputes                                                                  Redressal Forum, Jind