Haryana

Karnal

142/2014

Sunder Lal S/o Sadhu Ram - Complainant(s)

Versus

Oriental Insurance Company - Opp.Party(s)

Umesh Kapoor

11 Nov 2014

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL.

 

                                                           Complaint No.142 of 2014

                                                               Date of instt.26.05.2014

                                                               Date of decision: 16.07.2015

 

Sunder Lal son of Sh.Sadhu Ram resident of village Badarpur , Post office Biana tehsil Indri district Karnal.

                                                                   ………….Complainant.

 

                                                          Versus

 

The Original Insurance   Company Limited through its Branch Manager, near SBI, Railway Road, Kurukshetra.                                        

                                                                   ………..Opposite Party.

 

 

                   Complaint u/s 12 of the Consumer

                   Protection Act.

 

Before          Sh.K.C.Sharma……. President.

                   Smt.Shashi Sharma……….Member.

                  

 

 Present        Sh.Umesh Kapoor Advocate for the complainant.

                   Sh.Ramesh Chaudhary Advocate for the OP.

.

ORDER:                    

 

                        This complaint has  been filed by the complainant u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act , 1986, as amended upto date, on the allegations that he had one cow of Jersy breed, aged 8 years and six months and the same was got insured from the Opposite Party  ( in short OP) as per policy of the Government, for the period of  11.09.2013 to 10.9.2014 for an amount of Rs.50,000/- and the OP fixed tag bearing No. 110705/6013 in the right ear of the said cow. At the time of insurance, the cow was got medically examined by the OP.  However, on 21.3.2014 the cow died due to Gholeriosis. Post mortem on the dead body of the cow was got  conducted. Thereafter, the complainant lodged claim with the OP for payment of the insured sum of Rs.50,000/-,   but the OP repudiated his claim without any legal justification. The complainant has claimed the insured sum of Rs.50,000/- alongwith Rs.20,000/- on account of mental agony and harassment  suffered by him and  Rs.7700/- as litigation expenses

 

2.                Upon notice, the OP put into appearance and filed written statement disputing the claim of the complainant. Objections have been raised that the complainant has no clause of action to file the present complaint  and that the complaint is not maintainable.

 

                   On merits, the factum of getting insured one cow by the complainant from the OP has not been disputed. However, it has been  submitted that as per the health certificate the cow, which was got insured by the complainant, had white colour, whereas the complainant has filed claim in respect of his grey colour cow, which had allegedly expired due to illness. Moreover, the description  of the cow mentioned in the post mortem report does not tally with the health certificate.  There was manipulation or tampering with the tag because the tag  fixed by the OP in the right ear of the cow at the time of insurance was found in the right ear of the cow having grey colour.  Therefore, claim of the complainant was rightly repudiated, vide letter dated 9.05.0214.

 

3.                In the evidence of the complainant, he filed his affidavit Ex.CW1/A and documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C6.

 

4.                In  the evidence of OP  affidavit of Shri R.S.Bahlan, Senior Divisional Manager,Ex.OP1 and documents Ex.O1 to Ex.O6 have been produced.

 

5.                We have appraised the evidence on record, the  material circumstances of the case and arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties.

 

6.                The only dispute  between the parties is regarding the colour of the cow which was got insured and  the cow which had died and post mortem on the dead body of the same was got conducted by the complainant.

 

7.                The learned counsel for the OP has contended that as per the health certificate Ex.C6/Ex.O1 two cows were got insured by the complainant and the  cow bearing tag No.,110705/6013 was of white colour but the complainant in his claim  form mentioned the colour of the dead cow as grey with small portion of white colour.  In the post mortem report also, the colour of the cow has been mentioned as white and grey. It has further been argued that these circumstances indicate that cow which was got insured had not died and the complainant got post mortem done on the dead body of another cow, therefore,  his claim was rightly repudiated.

 

8.                                    The argument of the learned counsel for the OP is devoid of any substance and as such the same  cannot be accepted. No doubt, in the health certificate, the colour of the cow was mentioned as white, but it is admitted fact that the OP had   affixed tag No.110705/6013 in the right  ear of the said cow. At the   time of post mortem, the same tag was found on the dead body of the cow. The  breed of the cow, which was got insured was Jersy and as per post mortem report also the cow of the same breed had died. The Ops could not produce any material evidence which may indicate that tag which was affixed in the right ear of the insured  cow could be removed easily and fixed in the ear of another cow and no mark of changing the tag could be found on the ear of the dead cow. This aspect also cannot be ignored that due to weakness in the animal and change of weather sometimes  white colour may also appear to be grey in some cattle. The  other marks of the identification of the insured cow tally with the marks and identification mentioned in the post mortem report. Therefore, it cannot be said in any manner that  the insured cow had not died and the complainant got post mortem done on the  dead body of another cow by affixing ear tag of the insured cow. Therefore, we find deficiency in services on the part of the OP in not paying the sum insured to the complainant.

 

 

 

9.                Therefore, as a sequel to the foregoing discussion, we accept the present complaint and direct the OP  to make the payment of Rs.50, 000/- ( i.e. cost of the cow) to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the present complaint i.e. 26.05.2014  till its actual realization. The complainant shall also be entitled for a sum of Rs.5500/- towards harassment caused to him and for the legal fee and litigation expenses. The OP shall make the compliance of this order within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

 

Announced
dated:16.07.2015                                                                            

                                                                (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                   President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

                   (Smt.Shashi Sharma)

                             Member.

 

 

 

 

 

                    Sunder Lal Versus  The OIC

 

 

 

Present         Sh.Umesh Kapoor Advocate for the complainant.

                   Sh.Ramesh Chaudhary Advocate for the OP.

 

                   Arguments heard. Vide our separate order of the even date, the present complaint has been accepted. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

 

 

Announced
dated:16.07.2015                                                                            

                                                                (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                   President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

                   (Smt.Shashi Sharma)

                             Member.